“Avoid fighting if you can. The enemy wishes us all to be bogged down on their battlefields; they want to engage us all in war.
We want peace. We want justice. Work for conferences on crimes against humanity, use your mathaba networks, the mathaba is the headquarters of the green committees.
Go forth, victory is ours!”

      Muammar al-Qathafi
August 2011

The Role of the UN Security Council in Unleashing an Illegal War against Libya

Posted: 2011/07/31 From: Mathaba


Sooner or later, the legal case against NATO will have to be made. This article presents the absolutely shocking details of the clear illegalities of specific acts that lead to the implementation of Resolution 1973, and that the United Nations “Security” Council callously ignored.


By Leonor en Libia


This may be the first time that these details have appeared in the open.  This is an important document that should be used by Libyan lawyers, as well as any lawyer that believes in justice, to make the case for the cecessation of NATO’s aggression, as well as the recovery to the Libyan Jamahiriya of the Libyan wealth that was stolen by the criminal governments of the north. At the April 4 press conference marking the beginning of the Colombian Presidency of the Security Council for April, Nestor Osorio, the Colombian Ambassador to the United Nations was asked what on the surface would seem an unusual question by one of the journalists.


The journalist said (1): “In the wake of Security Council Resolution 1973 [authorizing military action against Libya–ed] are we to expect a more aggressive and proactive posture on the part of the Security Council in supporting rebel groups?” The journalist gave several examples of such rebel groups as the IRA in the UK, ETA in Spain and perhaps the Corsican rebels in France. Another journalist added the example of the FARC in Colombia. The question referred to the fact that with SC Resolution 1973, the UN Security Council had taken on to support an armed insurgency fighting against the government of a member nation of the UN. The Colombian Ambassador responded that SC Resolution 1973 had not been adopted to support the rebels in Libya, but a rebel group which started out as civilians who had now become the core of the armed rebellion.

The reason the Security Council had taken up the issue of Libya, he said, was because a member of the Security Council, Lebanon, had brought the issue to the Security Council. Ambassador Osorio added that the Arab League had asked for concrete action from the Security Council on Libya. Is it, as Ambassador Osorio proposed, that the issue of Libya was taken up by the Security Council because Lebanon, a member of the Security Council, brought the issue to the attention of the other members?


Is it that the Security Council was just deferring to the expertise of the Arab League, which the Colombian Ambassador presented as the relevant regional organization with respect to Libya? The Colombian Ambassador’s remarks raise the question of how the Security Council made the decision to approve SC Resolution 1970 against Libya, the first of two resolutions on the issue. Was it as the Colombian Ambassador claimed because of a recommendation from the appropriate regional group, or was there a more complex process at work?


Also, significantly in this situation, there were actually two conflicting recommendations to the Security Council from two groups, one from the Arab League, which is not a geographical regional group but is organized on some other basis, and the other from the geographic regional group that Libya is part of, from the African Union.


What were the factors that influenced the Security Council decisions first, to pass Security Council Resolution 1970 authorizing stringent sanctions, including a referral of Libyan officials to the International Criminal Court (ICC) and then, subsequently, to pass SC Resolution 1973, which authorized a no-fly zone and other military action? Ultimately these decisions set the basis for the NATO military alliance to join with the armed insurgency fighting against the government of Libya.


While it is difficult to determine the specific underlying reasons for Security Council action, this article will demonstrate that the explanation provided to journalists at the Colombian press conference differs significantly from the actual sequence of events that occurred at the Security Council with respect to Libya. By failing to account for the actual sequence of events that occurred, the Colombian Ambassador’s response left unanswered the critical question. How had the Security Council come to authorize military action against a member nation of the United Nations, in support of an armed insurgency against the government of that nation?


Such a course of action is clearly contrary to the UN Charter provision not to intervene in the internal affairs of a member nation of the UN (Article 2 Section 7). How the Issue of Libya was Brought to the Security CouncilLooking back at the sequence of events by which the issue of Libya was brought to the Security Council, leads to an important observation. It was not a Security Council member nation which started this process. Nor was it the Arab League. Rather it was a party that one could argue had no legitimate basis to speak at the United Nations, especially not to the Security Council. This party, was, by that time, the former Chargé d’Affaires to the United Nations for the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Ibrahim Dabbashi. Dabbashi

had taken the unusual actions of first announcing to the press that he had defected from representing the government of Libya at the UN, and then requesting an emergency meeting of the Security Council about the situation in Libya. His request to the Security Council began a process which, in less than a week, resulted in passing the stringent sanctions against Libya and the referral of its officials to the ICC that are included in SC Resolution 1970.


SC Resolution 1970 then set the stage for SC Resolution 1973 passed three weeks later which authorized military action against Libya. February 21 is an important date in this set of events. It is on February 21 that Dabbashi announced his defection from the service of the government of Libya at the United Nations. While an appropriate course for a defecting government official from a country would be to resign his official position as a Deputy Ambassador for Libya at the United Nations, this is not what happened.

It is also on February 21 that another important event occurred, though not at the UN. Another Libyan official, Nouri al Mesmari, officially announced his defection from his Libyan government position.  Living in France under the protection of the French government, he gave an interview to the French newspaper Liberation about his defection. What is significant about Mesmari’s action is that his defection puts Dabbashi’s defection in a broader context. A widely circulated article in the Italian newspaper Libero, an article which has not been refuted or denied, provides this context (2).


Mesmari left Libya in October 2010 for Paris, four months before the alleged suppression of demonstrations cited as one of the pretexts for the NATO aggression against Libya. Mesmari had been an important Libyan official with vast knowledge of and contact with the foreign service officials of Libya and vast knowledge of Libya’s contacts with government officials in other countries. Libero reported that after Mesmari went to Paris in October 2010, he was in contact not only with French foreign intelligence officials, but also with elements of the Libyan opposition.


His actions help to shed light on the events in Libya in February 2011. Learning about some of the activities Mesmari was part of between October 2010, and February 2011, several commentators propose that Mesmari, along with other opposition activists, and officials in the French intelligence, helped to foment the uprising in Benghazi that took place in February 2011. (3) Unlike the Egyptian non violent protests, the uprising in Benghazi very quickly became an armed uprising against the government of Libya.


Western media accounts of this rebellion, and Arab news media like Aljazeera, reported a series of unverified allegations by those involved in the rebellion itself, with little or no evidence presented to verify the accuracy of the reports. To this date, there is no evidence for the widely reported “use of mercenaries” or “bombing his own people.” (4). Mesmari was granted protection by the French government. In his February 21 interview with the French publication Liberation about his defection, he accused the Libyan government of genocide. He gave no evidence to support his claim. Similarly, when Dabbashi held a press conference at the Libyan Mission to the UN on February 21, he claimed that the Libyan government was guilty of genocide. He, too, offered no evidence for his allegations.

He called for the overthrow of the Libyan state headed by Muammar Gaddafi. Similarly, the lawyer for the Libyan mission spoke to journalists at the February 21 press conference. He indicated to journalists that he was from Benghazi. He, too, called for the overthrow of Gaddafi, the long time head of the Libyan state (a position called ‘Guide’). Following is the content of the letter that Dabbashi, as a defector from the official government of Libya, sent to the Security Council. The letter is dated February 21, 2011 (5): “In accordance with rule 3 of the provisional rules of procedure of the Security Council, I have the honour to request an urgent meeting of the Council, to discuss the grave situation in Libya and to take the appropriate actions.”


The letter is listed as an official document of the Security Council, and given the document identification symbol S/2011/102, dated February 22, 2011. It is worth noting that Rule 3 of the Security Council’s Provisional Rules of Procedure provides for a member nation of the United Nations to request a meeting (6).


Under Rule 3, Dabbashi, as a defecting Deputy Ambassador of Libya, was not entitled to take part in any Security Council procedures, especially not to request a meeting of the Security Council to take punitive action against the government he has defected from and is seeking to overthrow. Monday, February 21 was an official UN holiday (Presidents’ Day in the US) and the United Nations was not open. On the next working day at the UN, on Tuesday, February 22, the Security Council held a closed meeting on the situation in Libya, under the title “Peace and Security in Africa – Libya”(7).


At the meeting the Security Council heard a report on developments in Libya from Lynn Pascoe, the Under Secretary General for Political Affairs at the UN. In addition to the 15 members of the Security Council, 74 other nations of the UN were present at the closed meeting without any right to vote. So was Dabbashi. The Libyan Ambassador to the UN, Abdel Rahman Shalgham also attended the February 22 Security Council meeting, along with

Dabbashi. In informal comments after the meeting, Shalgham indicated that he had been in contact with a relative in Tripoli and was told that the alleged atrocities that the media was claiming had happened in Tripoli were not true. Similarly, speaking to the press, he indicated that he had been in contact with government officials in Tripoli who said that they, too, disputed the claims of atrocities taking place in Tripoli and planned to invite journalists from Al Arabiya and CNN to see for themselves that the allegations were inaccurate. (8) After he made his presentation to the Security Council, Under Secretary General for Political Affairs, Lynn Pascoe spoke to the

press at a stakeout. He was asked if he had any evidence of atrocities in Tripoli. He responded that the UN people on the ground there had no such direct evidence. (9)


Describing the February 22 closed meeting of the Security Council, the Reuters News Agency said that most of the Libyan delegation had defected. Reuters reported that the Security Council met at the request of Dabbashi, who “was no longer working for the Libyan government”.


It would appear to be a serious breach of UN protocol for a defecting official who had formerly been the representative of a nation that is a member of the UN, to be able to request a Security Council meeting and to have the Security Council grant the meeting and allow the defecting official to participate in the meeting. Similarly, to allow the defecting diplomat to make unverified allegations at the meeting against the government of a UN member nation would only compound the serious violation of the UN Charter represented by this abuse of UN processes. Here is the Reuters report (10): “UNITED NATIONS | Tue Feb 22, 2011 4:42pm GMT (Reuters) –


The U.N. Security Council held closed-door discussions on Tuesday on the crisis in Libya, with Western envoys and Libya’s own breakaway delegation calling for action by the 15-nation body… The council met at the request of Libyan Deputy Ambassador Ibrahim Dabbashi, who along with most other staff at Libya’s U.N. mission announced on Monday they were no longer working for leader Muammar Gaddafi and represented the country’s people. They called for Gaddafi’s overthrow.” Taking into account Mesmari’s activities with French intelligence officials and Libyan opposition figures, there is the basis to assume that there were powerful forces acting behind the scenes at the UN supporting Dabbashi’s activities and encouraging the Security Council to allow this abuse of its processes.


False Media Reports about Libya


Among the media reports at the time were unverified allegations that Libyan government planes were shooting at civilians in Tripoli and that there were many dead in various parts of Libya. Also there were reports that Gaddafi had fled to Venezuela.


Gaddafi and the Libyan government disputed these reports, with a video demonstrating Gaddafi was in Libya. This video was shown around the world demonstrating the inaccuracy of the false allegations being made about Libya. Also, the Libyan media disputed that there had been any such shooting of civilians from planes in Tripoli. Later Russian media provided reports of Russia’s surveillance of aircraft activity of Libya during this period.


That surveillance did not show any firing from aircraft (11). Despite having defected, Dabbashi continued to have access not only to the Security Council processes, but also to official UN press stakeouts to speak to reporters as if officially the representative of a member nation of the UN. At these press stakeouts Dabbashi attacked the Libyan government, accusing it of genocide, without offering any proof for his claims. He also continued to call for the overthrow of the government of Libya. Then on Friday, February 25, the Libyan Ambassador to the UN, Abdel Rahman Shalgham announced his defection and denounced the Libyan government during a Security Council meeting. The President of the Security Council invited the defecting Ambassador to take part in the meeting under Rule 37 of the Security Council’s Provisional Rules of Procedure. Rule 37 specifies that it is a member nation that can be invited to participate. A defecting Ambassador or diplomat has no basis to take part in a UN Security Council meeting. The Rule reads (12): “Rule 37 Any Member of the United Nations which is not a member of the Security Council may be invited, as the result of a decision of the Security Council, to participate, without vote, in the discussion of any question brought before the Security Council when the Security Council considers that the interests of that Member are specially affected, or when a Member brings a matter to the attention of the Security Council in accordance with Article 35 (1) of the Charter.”


An Ambassador who defects, by that act, is ceasing to represent the UN member nation. According to the rules of protocol (2005) online at the UN website, once an Ambassador ceases to represent his member nation, one would expect him to submit his resignation to the Secretary General. Thus it is not appropriate for him to be invited to take part in a Security Council meeting under Rule 37 of the Provisional Rules of Procedure of the Security Council. This Rule applies to an official representative of a member nation of the UN, not to someone who claims that he no longer represents that nation. Following is the relevant section of the rules of protocol (13). “Section X Termination of Service at Permanent/Observer Missions:


Permanent Representative Before relinquishing his/her post, a Permanent Representative/Observer should inform the Secretary-General in writing and, at the same time, communicate the name of the member of the mission who will act as Chargé d’Affaires a.i. pending the arrival of the new Permanent Representative/ Observer. It is of special importance to note that a Chargé d’Affaires a.i. cannot appoint himself and can hold this function only after being appointed by the Permanent Representative/ Observer or by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the State concerned.” It would appear to be outside the procedure provided for by Security Council rules for a defecting Ambassador to be part of a Security Council meeting as the representative of the government he claims he no longer represents, and denouncing the member nation he has defected from. At the Security Council meeting on February 25, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon spoke to the Security Council about the situation in Cote d’Ivoire and Libya. In his remarks on Libya, the Secretary General claimed he was basing his reports on accounts

from “the press, human rights groups and civilians on the ground.” He acknowledged that there was no conclusive proof for his allegations, but dismissed this lack of verifiable information by saying that action should be taken along with efforts to get more reliable information. This action is contrary to other situations where the Secretary General recognized the need for an impartial fact finding group and appointed such a group to obtain the needed information to determine what course of action to take to promote a peaceful settlement of the situation. After the Secretary General presented his unverified allegations, the defecting Libyan Ambassador was called on to speak. By February 25, Shalgham, too, had defected. (One could imagine that pressure for his defection may well have been a fear of the referrals to the ICC of Libyan officials being planned by some Security Council members.)


Contrary to an earlier promise to journalists that if he no longer supported the Libyan government, he would resign, Shalgham did not formally resign. Instead, he continued to use Security Council processes to encourage the Security Council to impose sanctions and ICC referrals on the government of Libya. In his presentation to the Security Council meeting on Friday, February 25, Shalgham made a virulent denunciation of the Libyan government, complete with analogies to Hitler. Shalgham ignored the conflicting accounts of what was happening in Benghazi and instead painted a picture of peacefully demonstrating civilians unjustly subjected to a massacre (14). Shalgham presented no proof for his allegations nor was he asked to present any. Instead, he was consoled by the Secretary General and members of the Security Council, with several Security Council members, embracing and comforting him.


The following day, Saturday, February 26, a day long emergency meeting was held at the Security Council. While the Security Council was discussing a resolution about Libya, Shalgham is reported to have sent a letter to the Security Council to influence the votes of its members. One journalist offered the following as the content of the letter Shalgham sent to the Security Council (15): “With reference to the Draft Resolution on Libya before the Security Council, I have the honour to confirm that the Libyan Delegation to the United Nations supports the measures proposed in the draft resolution to hold to account those responsible for the armed attacks against the Libyan Civilians, including trough [sic] the International Criminal Court.”


According to journalists waiting outside the Security Council meeting on Saturday February 26, some Security Council members indicated that their aim was to induce more defections of Libyan officials by including referrals to the International Criminal Court (ICC) in the Security Council resolution they were proposing. This is using the ICC as a political tool rather than as a means of punishing actual crimes. Libya is not a member of the treaty creating the ICC. Though the UN Charter provides for the Security Council to create tribunals it has no provision to force a nation not a member of a treaty organization creating a tribunal to be subject to its jurisdiction.


When Security Council members are asked under what authority they refer a national of a state not a member of the ICC to its jurisdiction, they cite a provision in the ICC treaty. But a provision of the ICC treaty cannot be substituted for some provision of the UN Charter. No provision of the UN Charter has been cited as providing the authority for the Security Council referrals of non treaty members to the jurisdiction of the ICC. Late in the day, on Saturday February 26, the Security Council passed Resolution 1970, imposing strong sanctions against Libya and referring Gaddafi and several others to the ICC. No proof of any wrongdoing was presented and no reference was made to any investigation into the allegations.

When the French Ambassador Gérard Araud explained why he votedin favor of SC Resolution 1970, he referred back to Shalgham’s “moving statement” at the meeting on Friday Araud said(16): “Yesterday, the Permanent Representative of Libya (sic) made to this Council a moving appeal for assistance.


France welcomes the fact that the Council has today unanimously and forcefully responded to that appeal”. In explaining his vote in favor of Security Council Resolution 1970, the Indian Ambassador explained that he was not inclined to support the referral to the ICC, but he was responding to the letter sent to the Security Council by Shalgham urging the Council to do so. The Indian Ambassador said: “(We) would have preferred a calibrated and gradual approach.


However, we note that several members of the Council, including our colleagues from Africa and the Middle East, believe that referral to the Court would have the effect of an immediate cessation of violence and the restoration of calm and stability. The letter from the Permanent Representative of Libya (sic) of 26 February addressed to you, Madame President, has called for such a referral and strengthened this view. We have therefore gone along with the consensus in the Council.” Similarly the Nigerian Ambassador explains: “We have taken into consideration the letter dated today from the Permanent Representative of Libya (sic) supporting the measures as we have proposed.” The Brazilian Ambassador also refers to the appeal by the defecting Ambassador in explaining her vote for Sec. Council Resolution 1970:


“In our deliberations today, Brazil paid due regard to the views expressed by the League of Arab States and the African Union, as well as to the requests made by the Permanent Mission of Libya to the United Nations.”(17) At the meeting, Dabbashi was given the floor to speak on behalf of Libya. Dabbashi denounced Gaddafi and thanked the Security Council members for granting his request for harsh measures against Libya and members of its government. The Secretary-General as the last speaker on the Security Council agenda, spoke about how he welcomed the sanctions and saw them as a means for a new governance regime in Libya. He said: “The sanctions that the Council has imposed are a necessary step to speed the transition to a new system of governance that will have the consent and participation of the people.”


This sequence of events can only be seen as a violation of the Security Council’s obligations under the UN charter. The provision of the Security Council rules used to invite the defecting former Libyan government officials into Security Council meetings were provisions providing for officials representing the government of Libya to speak. The defecting officials were now former government officials and as such had no authority to speak for the official government of Libya, and no authority to appear at Security Council meetings as officials of Libya. (18) The actions of such officials were not the actions of a member government. Unspoken was the process of how they had defected and through what arrangements with US and other western government agencies they had gained the ability to remain in the US and to participate in Security Council procedures.


The Security Council was providing support and aid to members of a group attempting to carry out a coup against the government of Libya. Such an action is contrary to the obligations of the UN Charter requiring the non-intervention in the affairs of member nations. The Security Council supported these defectors acting to overthrow the government of Libya. Also it failed to make any effort to initiate an independent investigation of what was happening in Libya. Apart from the biased western or Qatar supported media reports (reports from Aljazeera only represented the Libyan opposition viewpoint when it reported on the Libyan conflict), the Security Council did not seek out any other source of information. UN personnel in Libya were not requested to investigate the allegations.


No legitimate Libyan government official was invited to take part in Security Council proceedings. When the Libyan government tried to appoint legitimate government officials to replace the defector delegation, the US government would not approve the visa requests for the replacement delegates, in violation of the Host Country obligations of the US. In this way, the US prevented the Libyan government from being able to present its case before the Security Council. By March 3, 2011, the Spokesman for the Secretary General acknowledged that the Secretary General had received notice from the Libyan government withdrawing the credentials of Dabbashi and Shalgham (19).


Yet for a period of time, they had continued to speak to reporters at the official Security Council stakeout and their statements to the press were covered by the UN media services and were treated as official Libyan government statements available at the UN Security Council website. Eventually the access of the two diplomats was converted from diplomatic passes into courtesy passes granted at the discretion of the Secretariat so they could continue to have access to the UN, but on a more restricted basis than the official diplomatic access.


When some journalists questioned the grounds on which these defector diplomats continued to have access to official UN and Security Council procedures such as requesting a meeting of the Security Council, the spokesman for the Secretary General said that someone who has presented credentials to the Secretary General is the representative of a nation (20): Disagreeing with the Spokesman’s response, one journalist pointed out that the “Request for a meeting of the Security Council normally is by request from Member States, not from Ambassadors sitting in missions. Ambassadors ask for a meeting of the Council on the basis of a letter from the Foreign Ministry and, in this case, presumably there is no such letter emanating from the Foreign Ministry of Libya. So, on what basis, legal basis, is the Security Council meeting?” asked the journalist. Instead of acknowledging the accuracy of the explanation that it is member nations that are represented at the Security Council, not an Ambassador, particularly not an Ambassador who has defected, the Spokesperson for the Secretary General answered: “I think you know what I am going to say…ask the Security Council. Next question.” Part IV – Libya Prevented from Presenting its Case at the UN While the defecting Libyan diplomats have been supported and protected to have continual access to United Nations facilities, the opposite has been the case for the Libyan government. One good example of this departure from protocol obligations is demonstrated by two documents. The first is Security Council Resolution 1970 (S/RES/1970(2011). The document states in its opening statement (21): “Taking note of the letter to the President of the Security Council from the Permanent Representative of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya dated 26 February 2011.” (S/Res/1970(2011), p.1) The problem of acknowledging this letter this way in the body of Resolution 1970 is that on February 25, the former Libyan Ambassador to the UN, Abdel Rahman Shalgham had informed the Security Council that he had defected. By February 26 he no longer represented the Libyan government. Consequently there was no basis for the Security Council to refer to a letter from him, as a letter from the Permanent Representative of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya The Security Council should have found a way to hear from a member of the government of Libya, rather than substituting a defector Ambassador and his delegation for the official delegation of Libya. Despite several efforts of the government of Libya to appoint a new Ambassador to replace the defector Ambassador and his staff members who had defected, neither the UN nor the US, the host country of the UN, acted in accord with their obligations to make this possible. A letter from the Libyan government dated March 17 was sent to the Security Council President. It appears that this letter was not made an official document of the Security Council. Yet this letter provided the Libyan government explanation of what was happening. According to Article 32 of the UN Charter, the Security Council has an obligation to hear from member nations. The relevant portion of Article 32 states: “Any member of the United Nations which is not a member of the Security Council….if it is a party to a dispute under consideration by the Security Council, shall be invited to participate, without vote, in the discussion relating to that dispute.” (22) This would be true as well, for a state which is not a Member of the United Nations. The picture the Libyan government presents in the communication to the Security Council is one where there is an armed confrontation between armed insurgents and the State Authorities. (23)


This is a different description of the situation than any of the members of the Security Council publicly considered on February 26 when the Security Council passed Resolution 1970 or on March 17 when it passed Resolution 1973.(24) In the letter of March 17, Libya explains that what is happening is a confrontation between terrorist groups and the State Authorities. It cites Libyan Law No. 38 of 1974, article 1, as the basis for the armed forces of Libya to “maintain security, if the general safety of the ‘Republic’ or any part of it so requires.”


The letter explains that “Libyan army camps that have been attacked have taken no violent action against the armed attackers until the latter have brandished their weapons.” This is in conformity with Libyan law, the letter notes. The letter explains that “Article 2 of the same law provides that orders to fire may be given in the following circumstances: “(a) If any member of forces is attacked. (b) If rebels refuse to restore order, after having been warned and given the opportunity to do so. (c) If rebels carry out an armed attack against persons or property.” The letter from the Libyan government describes how the government is fulfilling its responsibility to protect Libyan residents and citizens by confronting the armed insurgents. The letter also says that Resolution 1970 and the draft of Resolution 1973, the resolution being considered for adoption on March 17, and subsequently adopted, “exceed the mandate” of the Security Council. The letter says that “what is at issue is not a conflict between two States, as provided for in article 24 of the Charter of the United Nations.” The Council therefore has no authority to adopt resolutions in such cases. The Charter, the letter explained, “provides that States shall refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity of any State.”


Also in the letter, Libya referred to the mission to Libya by the African Union that was planned for March 20 to negotiate a political solution. The letter called the adoption of resolutions under Chapter VII premature, until an evaluation of the situation had been made by the African Union. The Security Council made no mention of the letter or the points it raised when it went ahead and passed Resolution 1973 on the evening of March 17. Only an AP article mentioned that there was such a letter and referred to some of its contents, including the challenge Libya presented to the section of Resolution 1970 referring Gaddafi and his family members to the International Criminal Court (ICC). (25) After the March 17 Security Council meeting, the US and then NATO began bombing Libya. A letter dated March 19 from the government of Libya has been made one of the documents of the Security Council.


In the letter the Foreign Minister refers to previous letters that he sent to the Security Council which are not found in Security Council records. In the March 19 letter, he writes (26): “In my previous letters to you, I emphasized that an external conspiracy was targeting Jamahiriya and its unity and territorial integrity. I pointed out that the Security Council had been drawn into implementing this conspiracy by its adoption of Resolution 1970 (2011) and 1973 (2011) under which a ban was imposed on all aviation in the airspace of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya. By taking this decision,” the March 19 letter explained, “the Security Council has paved the way for military aggression against Libyan territory. France and the United States have bombarded several civilian sites, thereby violating all international norms and instruments, most notably the Charter of the United Nations, which provides for non-intervention in the affairs of member states.” Libya asked the Security Council to hold an emergency meeting “in order to halt this aggression, the purpose of which is not to protect civilians, as is purported, but rather to strike civilian sites, economic facilities, and sites belonging to the Armed Peoples on Duty.”


The UN Security Council discussed this request at a meeting on Monday, March 21 and decided not to grant the Libyan government’s request. As of February 21, the Libyan government has been deprived of the ability to have a representative to the UN. In March, when the Libyan government tried to appoint another Ambassador, the US government did not grant a visa. (27) Instead the defecting diplomats continue to have access to the UN and to use their presence at the UN to attack the legitimate government of Libya. An article published by Al Ahram, is unusual in that it presents an account of some of the abuse of Security Council procedures that occurred in passing Resolutions 1970 and 1973 against Libya. The article was written by Curtis Doebbler, the American Human Rights lawyer. Doebbler writes (28): “The West focused its propaganda machinery on the UN with a vengeance. And it was no mere ordinary propaganda campaign but a full-blown orchestration of history for the books. First, Libyan diplomats were induced and threatened to step down from their

positions and promised that if they supported the opposition they would be ‘taken care of.’ This resulted in the Libyan diplomats at the UN not only resigning, but doing so and still maintaining a type of diplomatic status that allowed them to advocate on behalf of the armed rebels who were challenging the government of Libya for control of their country.” Doebbler continues:


“This was accomplished by the spurious actions of UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, who issued special passes to the former Libyan diplomats after their government had withdrawn their credentials. Bypassing the UN General Assembly’s Credentials Committee and well-established protocol, the UN secretary-general for the first time in the world body’s history personally favoured one side in what was by now a civil war.” Among Security Council members there have been a number of complaints that the resolution they allowed to pass (1973) did not authorize the kind of NATO bombing of Libya in support of the rebels that has been carried out. Because of the veto power of the US, France and the UK, the Security Council appears to have no means of oversight over NATO to stop what they believe to be an abuse of Security Council processes.


In the context of the sequence of events that took place at the Security Council in February and March, the question asked at the press conference in April, “…are we to expect a more aggressive and proactive posture on the part of the Security Council in supporting rebel groups?” is about a serious change. The precedent set by the Security Council’s supporting an armed insurgency against the government of a UN member nation is a significant and dangerous precedent. It is an important issue to be seriously examined.(29) Notes 1) I.K. Cush of Global Breaking News, Press Conference for the Colombian Presidency, April 4, 2011


2) “French plans to topple Gaddafi on track since last November” by Franco Bechis


3) See the account in Libero of Nouri al Mesmari’s defection and connections with foreign intelligence forces. and;wap2


4) “‘Airstrikes in Libya did not take place’ – Russian military,” News, Russia Today (RT) Moscow, March 1, 2011. RT report was made by journalist Irina Galushko. Radio Netherlands, “HRW: No Mercenaries in eastern Libya”, March 2, 2011


5) Ibrahim Dabbashi, Letter to Security Council dated February 21, 2011, S/2011/102, February 22, 2011


6) Provisional Rules of Procedure of the Security Council refers to Article 35 of the Charter referring to ‘nations that are Members of the UN’ or ‘nations that are not Members of the UN’. Nowhere does it provide for defecting officials to request a meeting of the Security Council.


7) Closed meeting Security Council, no notes but the occurrence of the meeting is noted as 6486th meeting (closed) Peace and security in Africa Feb. 22, 2011


Video by Nizar Abboud of UN Ambassador of Libya, Shalgam, 22 Feb.  2011


English responses begin at approx. 1:53.


9) B. Lynn Pascoe, “Informal comments to the media by B. Lynn Pascoe, Under-Secretary-General for Political Affairs, on the situation in Libya,” Feb. 22, 2011


10) “UN Security Council Discusses Libya Crisis”. Reuters, Feb. 22, 2011


11) See note 4 above.


12) Provisional Rules of Procedure Security Council Rule 37


13) Manual of Protocol, United Nations Protocol and Liaison Service


14) Abdel Rahman Shalgham at the Security Council 6490th meeting, Feb 25, 2011, United Nations S/PV.6490


15) Letter Shalgham sent to Security Council as quoted on Inner City Press blog


16) Gérard Araud at the Security Council, 6490th meeting, Feb 26, 2011, United Nations S/PV.6491

See this transcript for other statements at that meeting quoted in the text.


17) The reference to the African Union was mistaken. The African Union called for dialogue and was opposed to the sanctions and referral to the ICC before the Security Council took its votes on Resolutions 1970 and 1973. See for example, Ruhakana Rugunda, “African Union Statement on the NATO Invasion of Libya: It’s Time to End the Bombing and Find a Political Solution in Libya”


18) See for example International Labour Conference, 5C, Provisional Record, 100th Session, Geneva, June 2011, Reports on credentials, Second report of the Credentials Committee, Representation of Libyan Arab Jamahiriya


19) March 3, 2011, Daily Press Briefing by the Office of the Spokesperson for the Secretary-General


20) Daily Press Briefing by the Office of the Spokesperson for the Secretary-General, February 22, 2011


21) Security Council Resolution 1970


22) United Nations Charter Article 32 can be found in Chapter 5 at


23) Letter sent to Security Council dated 17 March 2011 from Secretary of the General People’s Committee of Foreign Liaison and International Cooperation of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya to President of the Security Council. (English translation of document previously circulated in Arabic).


24) Ronda Hauben, “UN Security Council March 17 Meeting to Authorize Bombing of Libya all Smoke and Mirrors”, March 30, 2011


25) Edith Lederer, “UN Rejects Emergency Meeting Sought by Libya,” AP, March 22, 2011


26) Letter dated 19 March 2011 from the Secretary of the General People’s Committee for Foreign Liaison and International Cooperation of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya addressed to the President of the Security Council, S/2011/161


27) Turtle Bay blog “TurtleLeaks: No visa, no entry! How the U.S. bars diplos from the U.N.”


28) Curtis Doebbler ,“Libya: Who wins?”, Al Ahram, 7 – 13 April 2011, Issue No. 1042


29) According to General Assembly Resolution 396(V), December 1950, Recognition by the United Nations of the Representative of a Member State, when a controversy arises with more than one authority claiming to be the government of a Member State, it becomes a question for the General Assembly to consider in light of the purposes and principles of the Charter of the UN and the circumstances of each specific case.


See or


See General Assembly Resolution396(V), December 1950, Recognition by the United Nations of the Representative of a Member State , when a controversy arises with more than one authority claiming to be the government of a Member State, it becomes a question for the General Assembly to consider in light of the purposes and principles of the Charter of the UN and the circumstances of each specific case. See, General Assembly Resolution 396(V), December 1950, Recognition by the United Nations of the Representative of a Member State or

About Dennis South

I have been serving, for 43 years, the cause of helping to create a new, balanced and peaceful world. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


from the pen of Thierry Meyssan Thierry Meyssan French intellectual, founder and chairman of Voltaire Network and the Axis for Peace Conference.


His columns specializing in international relations feature in daily newspapers and weekly magazines in Arabic, Spanish and Russian. His last two books published in English : 9/11 the Big Lie and Pentagate. Thierry Meyssan

JPEG - 29.1 kb
The Libyan dinar is the first (and last?) currency backed by gold and by IMF Special Drawing Rights. In 2000, Colonel Gaddafi had thought of creating a pan-African currency based on gold, but was unable to pursue his idea. Also, in 2009, he had spontaneously availed himself of the Zhou project and adopted it unilaterally for his country.

The Zhou project on 29 March 2009, the governor of the People’s Bank of China, Zhou Xiaochuan, challenged the predominance of the dollar as reserve currency. Deploring that the objective of economist John Maynard Keynes to create an supranational currency (the Bancor) was not achieved at the end of World War 2, he suggested that the IMF Special Drawing Rights could be used to fulfill this function [9]

JPEG - 15.2 kb
Mr. Zhaou Xiaochuan has not said his last word.

At the London G20 summit on 2 April 2009, yielding to pressure, the United States agreed to the tripling of IMF resources and to the issuance by that institution of Special Drawing Rights (SDR) for a value of 250 billion dollars. They also acquiesced to the principle of a Financial Stability Council associating the major emerging countries. This idea was debated at the G8 summit at L’Aquila (Italy) on 8 July 2009.


Pushing the pin further, Russia submitted that the new world currency should be minted rather than being virtual. Dmitry Medvedev, who had a few sample of coins minted, slapped them on the table. One side displays the faces of the eight Heads of State, whereas the flip side bears the motto “Unity in Diversity”

[10]. The project was submitted to experts from the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs. Their report, in which Professor Popov of the New Economic School of Moscow took part, was examined on 25 April 2010 by a joint IMF and World Bank meeting [11].

This project should have seen the light of day on 26 May 2011 at the G8 summit in Deauville (France). The dollar would thus have met its demise as the reserve currency against the backdrop of an imminent cessation of payments on the part of the U.S. Federal Government. As for Washington, it would have had to give up financing its super-powerful military apparatus through debt and to start concentrating on its domestic restructuring.


Editor’s Note: It would benefit the reader to download: NATO’S SECRET ARMIES – OPERATION GLADIO  and view the documentary OPERATION GLADIO: NATO’S SECRET ARMIES.
~AlexandraThierry Meyssan.
The idea that the Bilderberg Group is behind the creation of a mysterious future World Government has been spreading for years. Having had access to the archives of this very secret club, Thierry Meyssan shows that this belief leads in a false direction, serving to mask the true identity and function of the Group. In reality, the Bilderberg Group is a creation of NATO. It aims to influence key leaders on a global scale and, through them, to manipulate public opinion to get it to embrace the ideas and actions of the Northern Atlantic Alliance.Every year since 1954, over one hundred of the most prominent personalities of Western Europe and North America meet – behind closed doors and under maximum security – within the Bilderberg Group.
This exclusive seminar lasts for three days and almost nothing of the debates filters to the outside world.Since the breakup of the Soviet Union, numerous journalists have taken an interest in this secretive, elitist organization. Certain authors have seen it as the beginning of a World Government, responsible for the major political, cultural, economic and military decisions of the second half of the twentieth century. This interpretation has also been voiced by Fidel Castro, but it has never been confirmed nor invalidated by any solid facts.In order to find out what the Bilderberg Group is or isn’t, I searched for documents and first hand witnesses. I obtained access to all of its records for the period 1954-1966 and numerous later documents, and I was able to talk with a former participant that I’ve known for years. No other journalist to date, including the authors who have popularized today’s stereotypes, has had access to this wealth of internal documents of the Bilderberg Group.Here’s what I discovered…

The first meeting

70 personalities from 12 different countries attended the first meeting of the Group. It was a three-day seminar, from May 29 to 31, 1954, near Arnhem (Netherlands). The guests were housed in two nearby hotels, but the debates were held in the Bilderberg Hotel, which gave the Group its name. The invitations with a letterhead from the Soestdijk Palace are intriguing: “I earnestly request your presence at the informal International Conference, to be held in the Netherlands in late May. This conference wishes to explore a number of issues of great importance for Western civilization and is intended to stimulate mutual understanding and goodwill through a free exchange of views.“ The invitations were signed by the Prince Consort of the Netherlands, Bernhard zur Lippe-Biesterfeld, and accompanied by several pages of administrative information concerning transportation and accommodation. At most, we learn that the delegates originated from the United States and 11 from Western Europe, and that 6 sessions of 3 hours each were scheduled. Given the Nazi past of Prince Bernhard (who had served in the SS cavalry until his marriage in 1937 to Princess Juliana) and in the context of McCarthyism in the U.S., it’s clear that the “issues of great importance for Western civilization” revolved around the struggle against communism.


Once there, the anticipation of the guests was mitigated by the two chairmen: U.S. entrepreneur John S. Coleman and outgoing Belgian Minister of Foreign Affairs Paul van Zeeland. The first was an active partisan of free trade and the second a supporter of the European Defense Community (EDC) [1].


Last but not least, at the far end of the table sat Retinger Joseph, the intellectual influence behind the British. All this suggests that the Dutch and British monarchies sponsored this meeting to support the European Defense Community and the economic model of free-market capitalism against the anti-Americanism that the Communists and the Gaullists were promoting. However, appearances are deceiving. The goal was not to campaign for the EDC, but to mobilize the elite for the Cold War. His Royal Highness, Prince Bernhard, was chosen to convene this conference because his status as a prince consort would give it a Stately character without being formal.


This was meant to hide the real sponsor: an inter-governmental organization which intends to manipulate the governments of some of its Member States. John S. Coleman was not yet the President of the Chamber of Commerce of the United States, but he had already created the “Citizen’s Committee for a National Trade Policy” – CCNTP. According to him, absolute free trade, that is to say, the renunciation of all customs duties, would allow countries allied with the United States to increase their wealth and finance the European Defense Community (in other words, rearm Germany and integrate its potential military power within NATO). However, the documents in our possession show that the CCNTP was a “Citizen’s” committee in name only.


This is actually an initiative of Charles D. Jackson, the White House psychological warfare adviser. The operation was controlled in reality by William J. Donovan, the former commander of the OSS (the U.S. intelligence service during the war), now in charge of building the American branch of the new secret service of NATO, Gladio [2]. Paul van Zeeland was not only the promoter of the European Defense Community, but also a politician of great experience. At the Liberation, he chaired the Independent League for European Cooperation (ILAE) whose objective was to create a customs and monetary union. This organization was established by Joseph Retinger, mentioned earlier. Specifically Retinger, who was acting as secretary for the Bilderberg conference, served during the war in the English secret services (OES) of General Colin Gubbins. A Polish adventurer, Retinger found himself advisor to the Sikorski government in exile in the United Kingdom. In London, he livened up the small world of governments in exile and compiled one of the best address books in newly liberated Europe.


His friend, Sir Gubbins, officially left the service and the SOE was disbanded. Retinger ran a small textile business, which served as a “cover”. In fact, alongside his counterpart Donovan, he was responsible for creating the English branch of Gladio. He participated in all of the preparatory meetings of the Bilderberg conference and was present among the guests, seated next to Charles D. Jackson. Unknown to the participants, the secret services of NATO were, in fact, the organizing power behind the scenes. Bernhard, Coleman and Van Zeeland were used as fronts. Contrary to the idea developed by the creative journalists who imagined the Bilderberg Group forging a secret World Government, this club of influential leaders is in reality a lobbying tool to promote NATO’s interests.


It is in fact much more serious and dangerous, because it is NATO which aims to be the secret World Government – guaranteeing the international status quo and maintaining U.S. influence. Moreover, the security of each subsequent meeting was not provided by the police of the host country, but by the soldiers of the NATO Alliance. Among the ten speakers, there were two former Prime Ministers (Guy Mollet, France, Alcide de Gasperi, Italy), three officials of the Marshall Plan, the Cold War hawk (Paul H. Nitze) and, above all, an extremely powerful banker (David Rockefeller). According to the preparatory documents, approximately 20 people were in the inner circle. They knew more or less in detail those who were pulling the strings and preparing in advance their work. The smallest details were prepared before hand and nothing was left to chance. On the other hand, the fifty other participants knew nothing of what was happening behind the scenes.


They were chosen to influence their respective governments and public opinion in their countries. The seminar was organized to convince these leaders and incite them to diffuse the point of view of the NATO Alliance in their respective countries. The debates didn’t address the major international problems, but rather analyzed the supposed ideological strategy of the Soviets and set out how it should be countered by the “free world“. The first statements assessed the communist threat. The “conscious communists” are individuals who intended to put their homeland at the service of the Soviet Union in order to impose a collectivist world.


They must be fought. But it was a difficult challenge because these “conscious communists” in Europe were embedded with a mass of Communist voters who knew nothing about their evil plans and followed them in hopes of improved social conditions. Gradually, the rhetoric became more radical. The “free world” must oppose the “world communist conspiracy“, not only in a general way, but also by responding to specific questions concerning U.S. investments in Europe or on decolonization. Finally, the speakers addressed the main problem which the Soviets, according to them, were exploiting to their advantage. For cultural and historical reasons, the political leaders of the “free world” used different arguments in the U.S. and in Europe, arguments that sometimes contradicted one another.


The most emblematic cases are the purges organized by Senator McCarthy in the United States. They were essential to save democracy, but the method was perceived in Europe as a form of totalitarianism. The final message was that no diplomatic negotiation, no compromise was possible with the “Reds“. The role of the Communists in Western Europe had be prevented at any cost, but it would take cunning: as they cannot just be arrested and shot. They should be neutralized discreetly, without their voters realizing what’s happening.


In short, the ideology developed was that of NATO and Gladio. No one said that elections should be rigged or that moderates should be assassinated, but all participants agreed that to save the “free world“, that freedom should be put “in brackets”. Although the proposed European Defense Community (EDC) was defeated three months later in the French Parliament under the attacks of the Communist deputies and the “nationalist extremists” (in other words, the partisans of de Gaulle), the Congress was none the less considered a success. Despite appearances, there was no intention to support the creation of the EDC or any other specific policy. The real goal was to spread the ideology of the ruling elite by influencing the opinion makers, who in turn would influence the rest of society. Objectively, the Western Europeans were less aware of the freedoms that they were being denied and increasingly aware of the freedoms that were not available to the people of Eastern Europe.

The Bilderberg Group becomes an organization

A second conference was held in Barbizon, France, from March 18th to 20th 1955. The idea that the conferences would be held annually and that they required a permanent secretariat became increasingly evident. Prince Bernhard became less visible after he was caught influence peddling (Lockheed Martin scandal). He was replaced by the former British Prime Minister Alec Douglas Home (1977-80). The following Presidencies were held by former German Chancellor and President Walter Scheel (1981-85), former Governor of the Bank of England Eric Roll (1986-89), former NATO Secretary General Peter Carrington (1990-98), and finally the former vice-president of the European Commission Etienne Davignon (since 1999). For many years the Chairman of the Bilderberg Group was assisted by two Secretary Generals, one for Europe and Canada (the vassal states) and one for the U.S. (the ruler), however, there has been only one Secretary General since 1999.


From one year to the next, the debates have been highly redundant. This is why the guests change regularly. But there is always a core group who prepares the conference in advance and the newcomers who are taught the atlanticist rhetoric in vogue. Currently, the annual seminars bring together over 120 participants, including one third of the permanent core group members. They were selected by the Alliance based on their social network and their capacity to influence the rest of society, irrespective of their particular functions in society. Thus, they remain members of the core group even after changing their job. Here is the exact list of the core group, including members of the Board of Directors, which serve as fronts for the guests, and the less visible members, in order to not scare away the newcomers. Board of directors

Josef Ackermann Swiss Banker, head of Deutsche Bank, Vice-Chairman of the Forum in Davos.
Roger C. Altman U.S. Banker, a former campaign adviser to John Kerry and Hillary Clinton, Chairman of investment Bank Evercore Partners Inc.
Francisco Pinto Balsemão Former Socialist Prime Minister of Portugal (1981-83), president and founder of the largest group of Portuguese television SIC. (T)
Fran Bernabè Italian banker, current director of Telecom Italia. (T)
Henri de Castries CEO of the French insurance-company AXA.
Juan Luis Cebrián Director of the Spanish media and broadcasting group Prisa.
W. Edmund Clark Canadian banker, CEO of Toronto-Dominion Bank Financial Group.
Kenneth Clarke Former vice president of British American Tobacco (1998-2007), British minister of Justice, vice president of the European Movement UK.
George A. David CEO of Coca-Cola.
Étienne Davignon Belgian businessman, former vice president of the European Commission (1981-85), current vice president of Suez Tractebel.
Anders Eldrup CEO of the Danish gass and oil corporation DONG Energy.
Thomas Enders Director of Airbus.
Victor Halberstadt Economy professor at the Dutch university of Leiden, business-consultant for various corporations such as Goldman Sachs and Daimler-Chrysler.
James A. Johnson U.S. financier, he was a major contributor to the Democratic Party and an architect of the nomination of Barack Obama. He is vice-chairman of the investment bank Perseus.
John Kerr of Kinlochard Former UK Ambassador to Washington, Vice President of oil group Royal Dutch Shell. (T)
Klaus Kleinfeld German CEO of the U.S. aluminium giant, Alcoa.
Mustafa V. Koç CEO of Koç Holding, the largest Turkish company.
Marie-Josée Drouin-Kravis Economic columnist in print and broadcast media in Canada. Researcher at the very militaristic Hudson Institute. She is the third wife of Henry Kravis.
Jessica T. Mathews Former Director of Global Affairs at the National Security Council of the United States. Current director of the Carnegie Foundation.
Thierry de Montbrial Economist, founding director of the French Institute for International Relations (IFRI) and the World Policy Conference.
Mario Monti Italian economist, former European commissioner for the protection of free-trade (1999-2005), co-founder of the Spinelli Group for European federalism.
Egil Myklebust Former president of Norwegian employers, director of Scandinavian Airlines System (SAS).
Matthias Nass Assistant director of the German Newspaper Die Zeit.
Jorma Ollila Finnish businessman, former CEO of Nokia, current president of Royal Dutch Shell.
Richard N. Perle Former Chair of the Defense Policy Board Advisory Committee at the Pentagon, He is a key leader of the Straussians (disciples of Leo Strauss) and as such, a major figure of neo-conservatism.
Heather Reisman Canadian businesswoman, CEO of the Publishing Group Indigo-Chapters.
Rudolf Scholten Former Austrian Finance Minister, Governor of the Central Bank.
Peter D. Sutherland Former Irish EU Commissioner for competition, then director general of the World Trade Organization. Former director of British Petroleum, current chairman of Goldman Sachs International, former President of the European section of the Trilateral Commission, and Vice-President of the European Round Table of Industrialists, now honorary president of the European Movement – Ireland.
J. Martin Taylor Former MP, CEO of the chemical and agribusiness giant Syngenta.
Peter A. Thiel U.S. Businessman, CEO of PayPal, president of Clarium Capital Management and Facebook shareholder.
Daniel L. Vasella CEO of the Swiss pharmaceutical group Novartis.
Jacob Wallenberg Swedish banker, he is the director of many transnational companies.
Members of the hidden core group
Carl Bildt Former Liberal Prime Minister of Sweden (1991-94), former special envoy of the European Union and the UN in the Balkans (1995-97, 1999-2001), the current Swedish Minister of Foreign Affairs. (T)
Oscar Bronner CEO of the Austrian daily Der Standard.
Timothy C. Collins American investor, director of the investment fund Ripplewood. (T)
John Elkann CEO of the Italian group Fiat Auto (his grandfather Gianni Agnelli was for forty years one of the leaders of the Bilderberg Group. He inherited the family fortune after the natural death of his grandfather Giovanni and the premature death of his uncle Edoardo. However, police sources were convinced that Edoardo was murdered after he converted to Shia Islam, so that the family fortune would remain within the Jewish branch of the family).
Martin S. Feldstein Former economic adviser to Ronald Reagan (1982-84), and current economic adviser to Barack Obama. He was on George W. Bush’s Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board. He teaches at Harvard. (T)
Henry A. Kissinger Former national security adviser and U.S. Secretary of State, central figure of the U.S. military-industrial complex, current president of the consulting firm Kissinger Associates.
Henry R. Kravis U.S. financier, investment fund manager KKR. He’s a major fundraiser for the Republican Party.
Neelie Kroes Former liberal Dutch minister of Transport, European commissioner for competition, and current Commissioner of the digital society.
Bernardino Léon Gross Spanish diplomat, Secretary General of the Presidency of the Socialist Government of Jose Luis Zapatero.
Frank McKenna Former member of the Supervisory Commission Canadian Security Intelligence Service, Canada’s ambassador in Washington (2005-06), Vice-President of the Toronto-Dominion Bank.
Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands She is the daughter of Prince Bernhard.
George Osborne British Minister of Finance. This neo-conservative is seen as a eurosceptic, meaning that he is opposed to the participation of the United Kingdom in the European Union, but he is a supporter of the organization on the continent within the Union.
Robert S. Prichard Canadian economist, director of print and audiovisual Torstar.
David Rockefeller The patriarch of a long line of Bankers. He’s the oldest member of the core group of Bilderbergers. He is also chairman of the Trilateral Commission, a similar organization incorporating Asian participants.
James D. Wolfensohn Australian Banker who acquired U.S. citizenship to become President of the World Bank (1995-2005), now director of the consulting firm Wolfensohn & Co.
Robert B. Zoellick American diplomat, U.S. diplomat, former U.S. Trade Representative (2001-05), current president of the World Bank.
The Bilderbergers don’t necessarily represent the companies or institutions in which they work. However, it is interesting to observe the diversity of their political and economic influence.

The Lobby of the most powerful military organization in the world

In recent years, the number of topics discussed at the annual conferences has increased to keep up with world events. But the subjects of discussion are not really important, because the discussions have no precise objectives in and of themselves. The conferences are merely a pretext to convey other messages. Unfortunately, we do not have access to the most recent preparatory documents and we can only speculate about the directives that NATO will try to disseminate through these leaders of opinion. The reputation of the Bilderberg Group has led some authors to imagine that the Group nominates people to important positions. This is ridiculous and it obscures those who truly pull the strings behind the scenes within the Atlantic Alliance. For example, during the last U.S. presidential elections, it was reported that Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton disappeared on June 6, 2008, in order to negotiate an end to their rivalry. In reality, they participated in the annual conference of the Bilderberg Group in Chantilly, Virginia (USA). The following day, Mrs. Clinton announced that she was retiring from the race. Some authors concluded that the decision was taken during the Bilderberg meeting. The logic is faulty, since the decision was already a foregone conclusion three days before, given the number of votes for Senator Obama at the Democratic Party’s nominating committee. According to our sources, something else happened. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton concluded a financial and political agreement. Senator Obama bailed out his rival financially and offered her a position in his administration (Clinton refused the vice-presidency and instead chose the State Department) in exchange for her active support during the campaign against McCain.


Then, the two leaders were presented by James A. Johnson to the Bilderberg Conference, where they assured the participants that they would work together. Barack Obama had already been NATO’s candidate for a long time. Mr. Obama and his family have always worked for the CIA and the Pentagon. [3] Moreover, the initial funds for his campaign were provided by the Crown of England, via a businessman named Nadhmi Auchi. In presenting the Black Senator to the Bilderbergers, the Atlantic Alliance was, in fact, organizing public relations at the international level for the future president of the United States. Similarly, it was reported that the Bilderberg Group held an impromptu dinner outside of the Conference on November 14th, 2009 at the Chateau de Val Duchesse, owned by the King of Belgium. The former Prime Minister of Belgium, Herman van Rompuy, delivered a speech. Five days later he was elected president of the European Council. Once again, some authors wrongly concluded that the Bilderberg Group had been the “kingmaker”.


In reality, the President of the European Union could not be chosen outside of the NATO circles, and it should be remembered that the European Union itself was the result of several secret clauses in the Marshall Plan. In addition, this choice must be endorsed by the Member States. This type of decision requires lengthy negotiations and is obviously not taken during an informal dinner with friends. Also according to our source, the Bilderberg Group President, Etienne Davignon, convened this special dinner to introduce Van Rompuy to his influential relays. These contacts were all the more necessary since the first person to occupy the new post of President of the European Council was totally unknown outside of his own country. During the meal, Mr. Van Rompuy outlined his program for creating a European tax to directly fund the institutions of the Union without going through the Member States. The role of the Bilderbergers was to proclaim far and wide, that they know Herman von Rompuy and testify to his qualities to chair the Union.


The reality of the Bilderberg Group is less romantic than some authors have imagined. The incredible deployment of military force to ensure security during the meetings is not so much intended to protect, but rather to impress those who participate. It does not display their power, but instead shows that the only real power in the West is NATO. Everyone has the “choice” to either support NATO and be supported by it… or fight it and be relentlessly crushed. In addition, although the Bilderberg Group developed an anti-communist rhetoric when it was created, it was not oriented against the USSR and is not today oriented against Russia. It follows the strategy of the Alliance which is not a pact against Moscow, but rather the defence – and possibly the extension – of Washington’s zone of influence. At its inception, NATO had hoped to integrate the Soviet Union, which would have implied a commitment from Moscow not to challenge the division of the world stemming from the Conferences of Potsdam and Yalta.


Recently the Alliance met with President Dmitry Medvedev at the Lisbon Summit and proposed that Russia join the group. It was not intended to be a form of subservience, but recognition of the existing New World Order, in which all of Central and Eastern Europe now falls under the U.S. orbit. Russian membership would be a sort of peace treaty: Moscow would concede defeat in the Cold War and recognize the new division of the world. In this case, the Bilderberg Group would invite Russian personalities to its annual meetings. Bilderberg would not ask these personalities to influence public opinion in Russia in order to Americanise them, but to convince them to renounce their dreams of past greatness and glory. French political analyst, founder and chairman of the Voltaire Network and the Axis for Peace conference. He publishes columns dealing with international relations in daily newspapers and weekly magazines in Arabic, Spanish and Russian. Last books published in English : 9/11 the Big Lie and Pentagate.

Translated from French by Michael McGee. [1] The EDC is a project aimed at creating a European army within NATO. It was rejected by Parliament in 1954 at the instigation of the French Gaullists and the Communist Party. It was not until 2010-11 that this project began to take form under the Franco-British partnership within NATO and during the War on Libya. [2] “NATO’s secret armies“, by Daniele Ganser. This work is published in serial form on in French. [3] “The Story of Obama: All in the Company” (Part I and II), by Wayne Madsen, Voltaire Network, 20 August 2010. ALSO SEE: WHO RUNS THE WORLD AND WHY YOU NEED TO KNOW IMMEDIATELY THE TRUE STORY OF THE BILDERBERG GROUP NATO’S SECRET ARMIES – OPERATION GLADIO

This entry was posted on May 10, 2011. It was filed under NATO, NWO, THE BILDERBERG GROUP, THE BILDERBERGS .

One Response


Confirmed: Libya War is CIA Op 30 Years in the Making

Posted: 2011/08/29
From: Source
In previous articles Mathaba has covered ‘Operation Mistral’ aimed at ‘Southland’ back in March, which was signed between Britain and France in late 2010 to attack Libya on March 21st, brought forward one day to prevent the landing of the African Union delegation Peace and Security Council.

By Tony CartalucciAlternative media activist David Icke, who has been warning about the false nature of the “Arab Spring” since it began over six months ago, has pointed out an astounding “flashback” regarding an August 3, 1981 Newsweek article titled, “A Plan to Overthrow Kaddafi.” ‘The details of the plan were sketchy, but it seemed to be a classic CIA destabilization campaign. One element was a “disinformation” program designed to embarrass Kaddafi and his government. Another was the creation of a “counter government” to challenge his claim to national leadership. A third — potentially the most risky — was an escalating paramilitary campaign, probably by disaffected Libyan nationals, to blow up bridges, conduct small-scale guerrilla operations and demonstrate that Kaddafi was opposed by an indigenous political force.” Quite obviously this plan has been executed verbatim with the necessary addition of a NATO intervention to rescue the above stated “paramilitary” campaign from Libyan security forces – a contigency plan explicitly spelled out in another Wall Street-London subsidized, signed confession, Brookings Institution’s “Which Path to Persia?” Using Military Force to Assist Popular Revolutions, page 109-110 (page 122-123 of the PDF): “Consequently, if the United States ever succeeds in sparking a revolt against the clerical regime, Washington may have to consider whether to provide it with some form of military support to prevent Tehran from crushing it.” “This requirement means that a popular revolution in Iran does not seem to fit the model of the “velvet revolutions” that occurred elsewhere. The point is that the Iranian regime may not be willing to go gently into that good night; instead, and unlike so many Eastern European regimes, it may choose to fight to the death. In those circumstances, if there is not external military assistance to the revolutionaries, they might not just fail but be massacred.Consequently, if the United States is to pursue this policy, Washington must take this possibility into consideration. It adds some very important requirements to the list: either the policy must include ways to weaken the Iranian military or weaken the willingness of the regime’s leaders to call on the military, or else the United States must be ready to intervene to defeat it.” The disinformation campaign began in February as overt, now verified lies were told to the public regarding both the nature of the uprising and the Libyan government’s reaction to it. As tank driving, jet flying battle hardened LIFG Al Qaeda mercenaries waged war against the Libyan army, the corporate media in tandem with NATO member states preparing to intervene, portrayed the uprising as peaceful placard waving activists being mowed down by machine gun fire and strafed by Libyan warplanes. Evidence now confirms no such atrocties took place, however the UN citing this intentional disinformation authroized NATO intervention.The very nature of the Benghazi rebels has been deceptively presented to the public. In fact, they are a collection of extremists and mercenaries, many of whom had been fighting recently in Iraq and Afghanistan against US forces. These mercenaries, who have been backed by the CIA and MI6 for the last 30 years (see time line), are being portrayed as an “an indigenous political force” opposing Libya’s government. It has just been recently revealed that the rebel commander attempting to seize Tripoli isnone other than Abdelhakim Belhadj, an Al Qaeda asset who was previously captured by in Malaysia, tortured by the CIA in Bangkok, Thailand in 2003, before being release back in Libya where he is now fighting on behalf of NATO.Additional disinformation comes in the form of media attempts to portray Qaddafi as a rambling madman who despite the disparagement, has turned out to be one of the few heads of state speaking any truth at all regarding the conflict besieging his nation. From his earlier claims that the uprising was foreign backed Al Qaeda, to now verified claims that the rebellion was nothing more than a means to usher in a foreign occupation and the despoiling of Libya’s resources, he has been spot on.

As rebels loot his home and his compound in central Tripoli, he is now being disingenuously portrayed as an opulent tyrant who hoarded state resources at the cost of his population. Betraying the duplicity of this lie is the UN’s own Human Development Index which lists Libya as one of the most developed nations in Africa and is ranked higher than many other nations including Russia, Brazil, Saudi Arabia, and Malaysia. Quite obviously Libya’s oil wealth was put to good use, and as Libya has ensured the West’s nefarious corporate-funded NGOs were excluded from Libyan society, no other explanation for Libya’s development exists beyond the government’s own initiatives.

What we are witnessing in Libya is a concerted, admitted war of aggression by corporate-financier interests who have openly conspired to carry out a campaign of military and economic conquest throughout the Middle East (and beyond), including Northern Africa and specifically including Libya. From Wesley Clark’s 2007 speech, to Newsweeks’ 1981 article, we have been handed a signed confession that “our” governments are the true enemies of free humanity, masking their agenda with the thinnest veneer of moral justification, almost as if to insult the intelligence of so many who eagerly continue to empower them as they maliciously move forward. Once again, we must commit ourselves to identifying the corporate-financier interests truly driving this agenda, lurking behind the military and political leaders paraded before us as the executors of “international policy.” We must also commit to boycotting and replacing these corporate-financier interests as well as ending the recognition of any of the legitimacy they endlessly heap upon themselves.

— See links below for details about the Franglo-American planned attack on Libya

About Divine Law

The truth shall set you free. Look within not without. Believe in yourself for the journey ahead will be a difficult one. No matter how difficult the obstacles are you shall find the right way. May our collective grow stronger everyday.



28SundayAug 2011

NATO Special Forces and Al Qaeda Join Hands

Prof. Michel Chossudovsky.  Global Research

Killing the truth is an integral part of the military agenda.

Realities are turned upside down.

The lie becomes the truth.

Its an inquisitorial doctrine. The NATO consensus dwarfs the Spanish Inquisition by a long shot.

Extensive war crimes have been committed. NATO has blood on its hands. The heads of government and heads of state of NATO member countries are responsible for extensive war crimes,

The “pro-democracy” rebels are led by Al Qaeda paramilitary brigades under the supervision of NATO Special Forces. The “Liberation” of  Tripoli was carried out by “former” members of the Libya Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG).

The jihadists and NATO work hand in glove. These “former” Al Qaeda affiliated brigades constitute the backbone of the “pro-democracy” rebellion.

NATO special forces with “boots and the ground” pass unnoticed. Their identity is not known or revealed. They blend into the Libyan rebellion landscape of machine guns and pickup trucks. They are not highlighted in the photo ops.

Special forces composed of  US Navy SEALS, British Special SAS Forces and French legionnaires, disguised in civilian rebel garb, are reported to be behind major operations directed against key government buildings including Gadhafi’s Bab al-Aziziya compound in central Tripoli.

Reports confirm that British SAS were on the ground in Eastern Libya prior to the onset of the air campaign. Special Forces are in close coordination with NATO air operations. “Highly-trained units, known as ‘Smash’ teams for their prowess and destructive ability, have carried out secret reconnaissance missions to provide up-to-date information on the Libyan armed forces.” (SAS ‘Smash’ squads on the ground in Libya to mark targets for
coalition jets
, Daily Mirror, March 21, 2011)

NATO special forces and the CIA sponsored Islamic brigades under the command of “former” jihadists constitute the backbone of combat capabilities on the ground, supported by the air campaign, which now includes Apache helicopter raids.

The remainder of the rebel forces include untrained trigger happy gunmen (including teenagers) (see photo below), which serve the function of creating an atmosphere of panic and intimidation.

What we are dealing with is a carefully planned military intelligence operation to invade and occupy a sovereign country.
Zohra Bensemra/REUTERS

Killing the Truth. The Role of the Western Media

The Western media constitutes a major instrument of war. NATO war crimes are obfuscated. Popular resistance to the NATO led invasion is not mentioned.

A narrative of  “liberation” and  “opposition pro-democracy rebel forces” is instilled in the inner consciousness of millions of people. Its called the “NATO Consensus”.

“The NATO Consensus” which upholds the “humanitarian mandate” of the Atlantic alliance cannot be challenged. The bombings of civilian areas as well as the role of a terrorist militia are either trivialised or not mentioned.

Killing the truth is an integral part of the military agenda.

Realities are turned upside down.

The lie becomes the truth.

Its an inquisitorial doctrine. The NATO consensus dwarfs the Spanish Inquisition by a long shot.

The criminal invasion and occupation of Libya is not mentioned. The lives of independent journalists in Tripoli who report on what is actually happening are threatened. The catch words are “Liberation” and “Revolution” with NATO’s mandate limited to R2P (“Responsibility to Protect”).

Liberation or Invasion? By camouflaging the nature of the military operation not to mention NATO atrocities, the Western media has contributed to providing the Transitional Council with a semblance of legitimacy and international recognition. The latter would not have been forthcoming without the support of the Western media.

NATO special forces and intelligence operatives on the ground are in permanent liaison with military planners involved in coordinating NATO strike sorties and bombing raids on the Libyan capital.

Intensive Bombing Raids over Tripoli

On August 27, NATO acknowledged the conduct of 20,633 sorties since March 31st, and 7,768 strike sorties. (These figures do not include the intensive bombing raids conducted in the two weeks prior to March 31st). Each fighter jet or bomber carries numerous missiles, rockets, etc. depending on the ordnance specification of the aircraft.

Multiply the number of strike sorties (7768 since March 31) by the average number of missiles or bombs launched by each of the planes and you get a rough idea of the size and magnitude of this military operation. A French Dassault Mirage 2000, for instance, can transport 18 missiles under its wings. America’s B-2 Stealth bombers are equipped with bunker buster bombs.

France’s Mirage 2000 used in Operation Odyssey Dawn against Libya

USAF Stealth B-2 Bomber used in Operation Odyssey Dawn

Pursuant to NATO’s humanitarian mandate, we are informed by the media that these tens of thousands of strikes have not resulted in civilian casualties (with the exception of occasional “collateral damage”).

Not surprisingly, already in mid April, three weeks into bombing campaign, the Atlantic Alliance announced that “NATO planes flying combat missions over Libya are starting to run out of bombs” (UPI, April 16, 2011);

“The reason we need more capability isn’t because we aren’t hitting what we see — it’s so that we can sustain the ability to do so,” one NATO official told the Post. “One problem is flight time, the other is munitions.” (Ibid)

The bombing raids over Tripoli were intensified in the course of the last two weeks. They were intended to support ground operations led by NATO special forces and the Islamic paramilitary brigades. With limited NATO ground force capabilities, NATO strategists decided to intensify the bombing raids.

Global Research’s Correspondent in Tripoli, whose life is threatened for revealing NATO war crimes described a shift in the pattern of bombing, starting in mid-July, with increasingly intensive air raids leading up to the ground invasion on August: 20th:

“Until approximately 2:35 a.m EET [July 17], the strident noises of fighter jets over Tripoli could be heard. The bomb blasts triggered an atmosphere of fear and panic over the entire city, a poignant psychological and emotional impact on tens of thousands of people, from the young to the elderly. It also alerted people and brought them out onto their balconies while they witnessed the bombing of their country.

One of the explosions resulted in a huge mushroom cloud, pointing to the possible use of bunker buster bombs. … There was something unusual in the pattern of this NATO bombing operation.

The bombings tonight were not like other nights. The sounds were different. The smoke plumes were different. In previous bombings the smoke would usually go up vertically like a fire, but tonight the smoke plumes were horizontal and hovering above Tripoli with a white cloud in the horizon.

People who were not directly affected by the bombs, within a radius of 15 kilometres experienced burning eyes, lower back pain, headaches.” (Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya, NATO Launches Bombing Blitzkrieg over Tripoli hitting Residential Areas , Global Research, July 17, 2011)

The mass killing of civilians in a Blitzkrieg environment as well as the creation of a generalized atmosphere of panic is intended to curtail the population’s resistance to the NATO-led invasion.

The Death Toll

According to sources from our correspondent in Tripoli, the death toll in the course of the last week (20-26 August) is of the order of 3000. The hospitals are in a state of turmoil, unable to come to the rescue of the wounded. The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) confirms that medical supplies are in short supply throughout the country.

In recent developments UNICEF has warned of shortages of water due to the NATO bombing of  water infrastructure throughout the country. “This could turn into an unprecedented health epidemic “ said Christian Balslev-Olesen of UNICEF’s Libya Office.

NATO warplanes deliberately targeted the peaceful vigil of tents in front of the Gadhafi compound in a gruesome massacre. The mainstream media acknowledges the massacre, while stating that gun wounds are the cause of death in crossfire between loyalist and rebel forces. The victims are :

“The identities of the dead were unclear, but they were in all likelihood activists who had set up an impromptu tent city in solidarity with Gadhafi in defiance of the NATO bombing campaign. (, August 25, 2011)

We are not dealing with collateral damage. Extensive war crimes have been committed. NATO has blood on its hands. The heads of government and heads of state of NATO member countries are war criminals.

The Central Role of Al Qaeda Operatives in the “Liberation of Tripoli”

According to CNN, in a twisted logic, the terrorists have repented:  “former terrorists” are no longer “terrorists”.

The LIFG is said to have been disbanded.

Following their disavowal of violence, these former LIFG leaders created a new political organization called the Islamic Movement for Change, which according to CNN “is committed to working within a future democratic process”. “The Libyan Islamic Movement for Change (Al-Haraka Al-Islamiya Al Libiya Lit-Tahghir), is made up of former members of the now defunct [CIA supported] Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG)” (Reuters, August 26, 2011)

In a contradictory about turn, former “bad guys” (terrorists) are heralded as “good guys” committed to “combating terrorism”.  The  “former” members of the Libya Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) are now portrayed as “pro-democracy activists” who “have assumed leadership positions in several rebel brigades”.

Labels have been switched: the CIA supported Al Qaeda affiliated LIFG has been transformed into the CIA sponsored Islamic Movement for Change (IMC), which supports the pro-democracy rebellion.

When was the LIFG disbanded?

In a bitter irony, the Libya Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) was listed until June 2011 by the United Nations Security Council as a bona fide terrorist organization. On June 21 2011, The Listing of Terrorist Organizations, conveniently vanished from the UN Security Council website pending the revamping of the website. (See annex below)

 The LIFG entry was included in the (updated March 24, 2011, accessed April 3, 2011) United Nations Security Council “terror list” as follows:


Name (original script):
A.k.a.: LIFG F.k.a.: na Address: na Listed on: 6 Oct. 2001 (amended on 5
Mar. 2009) 

(The LIFG Listing is on p. 70,, (accessed April 3, 2011, no longer accessible)
Other information: Review pursuant to Security Council resolution 1822 (2008) was concluded on 21 Jun. 2010. The website is down and is currently being revamped.

Who Leads Libya’s Islamic Brigades?

Recent reports confirm what was known and documented from the outset of the “rebellion” in mid-March:  The key military command positions of the rebellion are held by the “former” commanders of the Libya Islamic fighting Group (LIFG)”.

The commander of the assault on Tripoli is Abdel Hakim Belhadj, (also known as Abu Abdullah al-Sadeq, Hakim al-Hasidi). He has been entrusted, with NATO’s approval,  of “one of the most powerful rebel brigades in Tripoli [which] took charge of successful rebel efforts earlier this week to storm Gadhafi’s Bab al-Azziziyah compound, further bolstering his prominent position in rebel ranks.” (CNN, op cit)

“Sadeeq was a well-known figure in the jihadist movement. He fought the Soviet-backed government in Afghanistan and helped found [with the support of the CIA] the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group there.” (Ibidt)

But Saddeeq, according to CNN has repented. He is no longer a terrorist (i.e. a bad guy) “but a powerful voice against Al Qaeda’s terrorism”. (Ibid, emphasis added)

“In 2009, Sadeeq and other senior LIFG leaders formally repudiated al Qaeda style terrorism and disbanded their campaign to overthrow the Libyan regime.

The breakthrough was the result of a two-year dialogue with the regime brokered by Benotman [a former LIFG commander now in the employ of  the London based Quilliam Foundation with a mandate in conflict resolution. CNN interviewed leading figures of the LIFG in Abu Salim prison in Tripoli in September 2009, shortly before the group’s leaders were released. Although they were then behind prison bars, the leaders’ disavowal of violence appeared genuine. (Ibid)

According to DebkaFile (Israeli intelligence online report), the “pro-Al Qaeda brigades “led by LIFG Commander Abdel Hakim Belhadj constitute the dominant force of the rebellion, overriding the authority of the Transitional Council. They are in control of strategic buildings including Gadhafi’s compound.

“The LIFG chief [Abdel Hakim Belhadj] now styles himself “Commander of the Tripoli Military Council.” Asked by our sources whether they plan to hand control of the Libyan capital to the National Transitional Council, which has been recognized in the West, the jihadi fighters made a gesture of dismissal without answering. (Debka, Pro-Al Qaeda brigades control Qaddafi Tripoli strongholds seized by rebels, August 28, 2011 )

Abdul Hakim Belhhadj  received military training in CIA sponsored guerrilla camp in Afghanistan. An earlier report suggests that he  has some 1,000 men under his command. (Libyan rebels at pains to distance themselves from extremists – The Globe and Mail, March 12, 2011)

The US-NATO coaltion is arming the Jihadists. Weapons are being channelled to the LIFG from Saudi Arabia, which historically, since the outset of the Soviet-Afghan war, has covertly supported Al Qaeda. The Saudis are now providing the rebels, in liaison with Washington and Brussels, with anti-tank rockets and ground-to-air missiles. (See Michel Chossudovsky  “Our Man in Tripoli”: US-NATO Sponsored Islamic Terrorists Integrate Libya’s Pro-Democracy Opposition, Global Research, 3 April 2011)

Photo : ‎الصحفية البريطانية ليزي فيلان تروي ما رأته عن مجزرة ماجر بشعبية زليتن والتي استشهد خلالها 85 مواطنا ليبيا اثر قصف طائرات بريطانية لمجمع سكني.‎

A “Democracy” run by Terrorists

Reports also confirm that large numbers of  terrorists imprisoned in Abu Salim jail were released by rebel forces. They are now being recruited by the former LIFG Islamic brigades, led by “former” jihadists pro-democracy commanders.

So all ends well in the smooth transition towards a democracy run by terrorists.

NATO’s Islamic Jihad

There is indications that NATO, in coordination with Western intelligence agencies (including Israel’s Mossad), is involved in recruiting Islamist fighters. Israeli intelligence sources confirm that NATO in cooperation with Turkey, is now directly training and recruiting in several Muslim countries a new jihadist generation of  “Freedom Fighters”. The Mujahideen after undergoing training are slated to participate in NATO’s “pro-democracy” “humanitarian” military campaigns. The Israeli report by Debka pertains to Syria, which is next  in line on the NATO military roadmap:

“Our sources report, is a [NATO] campaign to enlist thousands of Muslim volunteers in Middle East countries and the Muslim world to fight alongside the Syrian rebels… ” (Debka File August 15, 2011 )

Concluding Remarks

The conduct of the NATO led invasion and occupation of Libya is making use of Islamic fighters as the backbone of an alleged transition to democracy.

The tragic events of  9/11 have played a key role in developing a massive propaganda campaign geared towards justifying a “war on terrorism” directed against Osama bin Laden’s Al Qaeda.

In a bitter twist, throughout the Middle East and Central Asia, the Western military alliance is using Islamic brigades, trained and groomed by the CIA, MI6 and Mossad, to wage its “Global War on Terrorism”.

The war on terrorism constitutes a broad consensus instilled in the minds of millions of people, What is not known to Western public opinion is that the West’s holy crusade against Islamic terrorism rather than targeting terrorists actually includes terrorists in his ranks, i.e  Al Qaeda “freedom fighters” have been integrated into the ranks of US-NATO led military operations.

Rest assured, in the case of Libya, the rebels are “the good guys”: they are “former” rather than “active” members of Al Qaeda.

The Western media has not reported on NATO war crimes. It has casually dismissed NATO atrocities: 8000 strike sorties represents more than 50,000 missiles and bombs dropped on the Libyan people.

There are various ways of concealing the truth. From the outset of the air campaign, the media has denied the existence of a war. Its causes and consequences are distorted. In turn, an effective propaganda campaign requires targeting people’s mindset in newspapers, network TV and online.

People must be distracted from an understanding of the war on Libya. News coverage is redirected towards a number of trivial “talking points”, including the size of Gadhafi’s swimming pool, his female bodyguards, his cosmetic plastic surgery. The Guardian, August 23, 2011)

Not included in the journalist’s “to do list” is the coverage of the three thousand  men, women and children who lost their lives in the course of a weeklong Blitzkrieg bombing of Tripoli using the most advanced weapons systems in human history.

Against this background of lies and fabrications, the lives of several independent journalists including Global Research’s Correspondent Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya trapped in Tripoli were threatened, for saying the truth.


The Libya Islamic Fighting Group was listed until June 10th as a terrorist organization. The United Nations Security Council, confirmed that the LIFG is bona fide terrorist: organization. The LIFG entry was included in the (updated March 24, 2011, accessed April 3, 2011) United Nations Security Council “terror list” as follows:


Name (original script):

A.k.a.: LIFG F.k.a.: na Address: na Listed on: 6 Oct. 2001 (amended on 5 Mar. 2009)

Other information: Review pursuant to Security Council resolution 1822 (2008) was concluded on 21 Jun. 2010

(The LIFG Listing is on p. 70,, (accessed April 3, 2011) Under the UNSC rules disbanded terrorist organizations are removed from the list in conformity with a delisting procedure. The LIFG has not been removed from the list).

United Nations Security Council:

>Consolidated List established and maintained by the 1267 Committee with respect to Al-Qaida, Usama bin Laden, and the Taliban and other individuals, groups, undertakings and entities associated with them (updated March 24, 2011).

The above entry was on the UN Security Council’s list of terrorist organizations until June 10th. A new UNSC resolution was passed on June 10 and The Listing of Terrorist Organizations updated on March 24, 2011, conveniently vanished from the UN Security Council website pending the revamping of the website:

On 17 June 2011, the Security Council unanimously adopted resolutions 1988 (2011) and 1989 (2011) as successor resolutions to resolution 1904 (2009). By adopting these resolutions, the Security Council decided to split the Al-Qaida and Taliban sanctions regime. Resolution 1989 (2011) stipulates that the sanctions list maintained by the Security Council Committee established pursuant to resolution 1267 (1999) will henceforth be known as the “Al-Qaida Sanctions List” and include only names of those individuals, groups, undertakings and entities associated with Al Qaida.

Pursuant to these decisions by the Security Council, this website is in the process of being updated. In this interim period, any remaining references to the Consolidated List on this website should be considered as references to the Al-Qaida Sanctions List.


NATO, Terrorist Rebels Accused of War Crimes in Libya

Posted: 2011/08/19 From: Source

A school in Zlitan, bombed by NATO

By Alex Newman The North Atlantic Terrorist Organization (NATO) is being heavily criticized for civilian casualties and a series of bombings apparently targeting essential non-military infrastructure in Libya, with some observers calling the actions war crimes. The Libyan rebels being supported by coalition forces have also been accused of wanton savagery and even crimes against humanity. Most recently, a NATO bombing campaign near the Libyan city of Zlitan earlier this month reportedly killed almost 100 civilians — more than half of them women and children. The attack sparked a new wave of outrage worldwide as journalists and activists called for investigations.
Representatives of the Libyan government took a large group of foreign reporters to the site. They were reportedly shown bodies of women and children, including the remains of a baby. Multiple bombed out homes were also presented to international journalists. “Today was yet another crime by NATO against civilians,” Libyan government spokesman Moussa Ibrahim was quoted as saying by Fox News about the attack, noting that over 1,000 civilians had been killed by NATO so far. “They are killing women and children.
This happens every day. Help us to stop this madness.” The Western military alliance defended the strikes, saying they were against “legitimate” targets. According to NATO spokespeople, the coalition believed the town was being used as a staging ground for pro-Gaddaffi forces and tribes aimed at repelling an upcoming rebel invasion of Tripoli. But the victims cited in news reports said that was not the case.
“NATO bombed us, for what reason? We did not do anything to them. We are civilian people,” a man who lost his daughter and his home in the strike was quoted as saying in The Australian newspaper. “Why did they kill us? We had peace in my house with our family. What did we do to the other countries?” International law expert Franklin Lamb, writing in the Foreign Policy Journal from Tripoli over the weekend, accused NATO of committing a “massacre” after visiting the bombing site. Citing international lawyers, U.S. congressional staffers and human rights activists visiting the war-torn nation, he charged that NATO had “committed war crimes and crimes against humanity.”
Other foreign reporters — particularly from Russia — have been fiercely critical of the NATO campaign for months. “Do those who planned this and other crimes have a right to live? I’m talking about the Bilderberg club. What would they feel if their families are also deprived of a quiet life, and then killed in cold blood?” wrote Russian columnist Konstantyn Scheglikov following the bombings, attacking the “NATO maniacs who do not like the resistance of the small North African country.” Other reporters who toured the site offered similarly devastating analysis of what happened. Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya with the Centre for Research on Globalization said civilians in Tripoli and other major Libyan cities were “bombed indiscriminately by NATO” in recent weeks. “In Zliten, 85 people were killed including 33 children, 32 women, and 20 men as a result of NATO’s deliberate targeting of residential areas and civilian infrastructure,” he wrote, posting a dozen pictures showing the aftermath of the attack, which he called “photographic evidence of NATO war crimes.” International human rights groups also had questions about the bombing. “NATO continues to stress its commitment to protect civilians,” said Amnesty International’s Hassiba Hadj Sahraoui in a statement. “To that effect, it should thoroughly investigate this and all other recent incidents in which civilians were reportedly killed in western Libya as a result of air strikes.” In addition to the hundreds or even thousands of “collateral damage” deaths so far, NATO is also under fire for air strikes on civilian infrastructure. On July 25, the Associated Press reported that the international coalition bombed a hospital, leaving several doctors dead. Another infrastructure attack that drew international condemnation was the bombing of facilities associated with Libya’s so-called Great Man-Made River system, a pipeline that delivers water to a large percentage of the population. The Pakistan Observer said the attack was “a clear war crime” and could easily lead to a “humanitarian disaster.” On July 30, NATO warplanes also repeatedly bombed a Libyan television station, killing three and injuring 15. Surviving journalists blasted the attack and called for international support from other reporters. “We are not a military target, we are not officers in the army and not a threat to civilians,” the Libya Broadcasting Department Employees said in a statement after the attack, which it called an “act of international terrorism” and a violation of international law.
“We are doing our job as journalists in representing what from the bottom of my heart we believe is the reality of the NATO aggression and violence in Libya.” Countless press-freedom groups including the International News Safety Institute and the International Federation of Journalists have demanded an investigation of the attack. But NATO defended the bombing, saying the TV station was being used to spread pro-Gaddafi propaganda. A separate incident in early August involving NATO’s alleged failure to rescue ocean-bound refugees in distress has also been widely criticized around the world. According to news reports, up to 100 people died escaping Libya on a rickety boat after the engine died and nearby NATO ships failed to respond to SOS calls.
“The idea that NATO, with all its surveillance technology, was not aware of a boat of this size is a story that not even Little Red Riding Hood would believe,” charged Italian Parliamentarian Roberto Castelli. The government of Italy has requested an inquiry to find out why the refugees were apparently left to die. The internationally backed rebels trying to seize power in Libya have also been accused of numerous war crimes and wide-scale barbarity — some of it too horrendous even to mention. Numerous gruesome videos have been posted online showing beheadings, lynchings and other crimes, proving that at least some of the allegations are true. “The evidence provided by these videos makes clear that the rebels’ conception of warfare has more in common with that of Al-Qaeda than that of the Geneva Conventions,” explained John Rosenthal in a piece for the U.S.-based Hudson Institute.
“The abuses documented in the videos could serve as textbook examples of precisely the sort of savagery that the Geneva Conventions were supposed to prevent.” As The New American and countless other sources have reported, the NATO-backed rebels are, in many cases, led by self-described leaders of al Qaeda and other extreme Islamic groups that have boasted of battling American forces everywhere from Iraq to Afghanistan.
Some of the leaders are even former U.S. prisoners who were held in Guantanamo Bay. Suspicions about the rebels’ true motives and supporters were also raised when the self-proclaimed Interim Transitional National Council announced the creation of a new central bank weeks after the NATO invasion. It remains unclear whether the new monetary authority will follow the Gaddaffi regime’s state-owned model, or if it is to be privately owned like the U.S. Federal Reserve. Though Western powers were arming the rebels well before intervention became official, the Obama administration and NATO publicly intervened in Libya in mid-March to enforce a United Nations resolution. Since then, the “mission” has morphed into “regime change,” with foreign powers hoping to oust dictator Gaddafi and install the rebels as the new government. Without congressional approval, which Obama himself acknowledged in 2007 is required by the U.S. Constitution prior to foreign militarism, critics have charged that American involvement is itself illegal. And while the administration has already informed Congress that it would ignore any attempt to rein in the war, critics worldwide are still hoping that there will eventually be some accountability and justice if crimes were indeed committed. #

Truth, Propaganda and Media Manipulation: How the U.S. Maintains the Illusion

Posted: 2011/08/27 From: Source
The mainstream media is the most obvious in its inherent bias and manipulation.
Never before has it been so important to have independent, honest voices and sources of information. We are – as a society – inundated and overwhelmed with a flood of information from a wide array of sources, but these sources of information, by and large, serve the powerful interests and individuals that own them. The main sources of information, for both public and official consumption, include the mainstream media, alternative media, academia and think tanks. The mainstream media is the most obvious in its inherent bias and manipulation. The mainstream media is owned directly by large multinational corporations, and through their boards of directors are connected with a plethora of other major global corporations and elite interests. An example of these connections can be seen through the board of Time Warner. Time Warner owns Time Magazine, HBO, Warner Bros., and CNN, among many others. The board of directors includes individuals past or presently affiliated with: the Council on Foreign Relations, the IMF, the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, Warburg Pincus, Phillip Morris, and AMR Corporation, among many others. Two of the most “esteemed” sources of news in the U.S. are the New York Times (referred to as “the paper of record”) and the Washington Post. The New York Times has on its board people who are past or presently affiliated with: Schering-Plough International (pharmaceuticals), the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, Chevron Corporation, Wesco Financial Corporation, Kohlberg & Company, The Charles Schwab Corporation, eBay Inc., Xerox, IBM, Ford Motor Company, Eli Lilly & Company, among others. Hardly a bastion of impartiality. And the same could be said for the Washington Post, which has on its board: Lee Bollinger, the President of Columbia University and Chairman of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York; Warren Buffett, billionaire financial investor, Chairman and CEO of Berkshire Hathaway; and individuals associated with (past or presently): the Coca-Cola Company, New York University, Conservation International, the Council on Foreign Relations, Xerox, Catalyst, Johnson & Johnson, Target Corporation, RAND Corporation, General Motors, and the Business Council, among others. It is also important to address how the mainstream media is intertwined, often covertly and secretly, with the government. Carl Bernstein, one of the two Washington Post reporters who covered the Watergate scandal, revealed that there were over 400 American journalists who had “secretly carried out assignments for the Central Intelligence Agency.” Interestingly, “the use of journalists has been among the most productive means of intelligence-gathering employed by the CIA.” Among organizations which cooperated with the CIA were the “American Broadcasting Company, the National Broadcasting Company, the Associated Press, United Press International, Reuters, Hearst Newspapers, Scripps-Howard, Newsweek magazine, the Mutual Broadcasting System, the Miami Herald and the old Saturday Evening Post and New York Herald-Tribune.” By far the most valuable of these associations, according to CIA officials, have been with the New York Times, CBS and Time Inc. The CIA even ran a training program “to teach its agents to be journalists,” who were “then placed in major news organizations with help from management.” These types of relationships have continued in the decades since, although perhaps more covertly and quietly than before. For example, it was revealed in 2000 that during the NATO bombing of Kosovo, “several officers from the US Army’s 4th Psychological Operations (PSYOPS) Group at Ft. Bragg worked in the news division at CNN’s Atlanta headquarters.” This same Army Psyop outfit had “planted stories in the U.S. media supporting the Reagan Administration’s Central America policies,” which was described by the Miami Herald as a “vast psychological warfare operation of the kind the military conducts to influence a population in enemy territory.” These Army PSYOP officersalso worked at National Public Radio (NPR) at the same time. The US military has, in fact, had a strong relationship with CNN. In 2008, it was reported that the Pentagon ran a major propaganda campaign by using retired Generals and former Pentagon officials to present a good picture of the administration’s war-time policies. The program started in the lead-up to the Iraq War in 2003 and continued into 2009. These officials, presented as “military analysts”, regurgitate government talking points and often sit on the boards of military contractors, thus having a vested interest in the subjects they are brought on to “analyze.” The major philanthropic foundations in the United States have often used their enormous wealth to co-opt voices of dissent and movements of resistance into channels that are safe for the powers that be. As McGeorge Bundy, former President of the Ford Foundation once said, “Everything the Foundation does is to make the world safe for Capitalism.” Examples of this include philanthropies like the Rockefeller Foundation, Ford Foundation and the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation providing immense financial and organizational support to Non-Governmental Organizations. Furthermore, the alternative media are often funded by these same foundations, which has the effect of influencing the direction of coverage as well as the stifling of critical analysis.

Why NATO Is Danger To World Peace – Lies For Devastating Wars Against Serbia, Iraq, Now Libya NATO is committing war crimes in Libya Saturday NATO forces attacked Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi’s compound and killed his youngest son and three of his grand children who were all under the age of twelve. Within twenty-four hours US President Barak Obama announced the death of al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden in order to shift the spotlight away from the war crimes committed by NATO forces in Libya. The African media shouldn’t buy into that diversionary tactic. They should focus on covering the war crimes and the violation of international law. International law is a gimmick. It is used selectively to achieve the objectives of western imperialism. More than twenty years ago when I wrote about the “new world order” and the west’s plan to recolonise Africa, many people perhaps thought I must have smoked something very strong. I recently wrote about two articles for Foreign Affairs, a publication of the Council on Foreign Relations and Canada’s Globe and Mail which published an article and editorial on the recolonisation of Africa. Events in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Ivory Coast point to that direction and betray the west’s plan of establishing a “new world order”. Those who were old enough will remember the words of George Bush Senior in 1991 prior to the first invasion of Iraq when he spoke about a “new world order” which apparently the Ba’ath Party of Saddam Hussein wanted to derail. Research reveals that a “new world order” is the establishment of a one-world-dictatorial government. The west doesn’t give a hoot about world opinion now that the Warsaw Pact no longer exists and we now live in a unipolar world where only one superpower dominates. And they become surprised when such hegemony breeds the likes of Bin Laden and others. By the way if Bin Laden has been killed that doesn’t wipe out the west’s headache because Bin Laden’s ideology, movement and objectives are going to remain with his followers. As far as Afghanistan is concerned, the Taliban are fighting against foreign occupation which has nothing to do with the presence or absence of Bin Laden. Moreover, Israel is the common denominator and has escaped the glare of the media because of events in the Arab world. The Palestinian question is a unifying factor and still outstanding and will not go away until it is resolved. Sam Ditshego KAGISO, SA May 18, 2011 at 9:50 am _________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Libya: Events Between February and April 2011

Posted: 2011/08/10 From: Mathaba

This documentary explains the development of the Libya crisis from its outbreak in February 2011 until the end of April when the document was aired.

The date of this documentary is estimated end of April 2011 because it mentions the attacks on Muammar Qaddafi by NATO at the end of April but not the fatal NATO bombing of May 1st which killed family friends, babies and children of the Qaddafi family. The Importance of Prayer Posted: 2011/08/11 From: Source Share on TwitterFacebook “Enjoin prayer on your people, and steadily adhere to it. We do not ask from you a sustenance. We provide for you. And the (good) end is for guarding against evil.” –Holy Qur’an 20:132 By Sultan Rahman Muhammad “Enjoin prayer on your people, and steadily adhere to it. We do not ask from you a sustenance. We provide for you. And the (good) end is for guarding against evil.” —Holy Qur’an 20:132 Prayer is a universal institution, which has existed throughout the most ancient of times of humanity until this very day. Prayer has been practiced by all of the prophets, on them be peace. It is a tradition so strong in our natural urges that it will never be abolished. Prophets had the practice of offering prayer in the morning, the night and some are recorded in the Bible as having prayed in midday.

It is the symbol of humble reverence before the Creator of the heavens and the earth and it represents the justice and equality we find as servants in surrender to the Will of Almighty God. Qadhafi praying Prayer is the soul of all religions and it has always formed an essential part of Islam. Prophet Muhammad, peace be on him, guided by Divine inspiration, established prayer five times a day. When telling how prayer was prescribed for his followers he said, “I asked Allah and He said these are five prayers and they are equal to fifty and what has been said will not be changed.” In Islam the five prayers of the day are equal in reward to fifty prayers!

Yet, even with this exponential blessing we must ask ourselves, ‘Do I neglect my prayers?’, ‘Could I be more perfect in my communication with my Lord?’ The word ‘prayer’ within Western context does not fully capture what in the religion of Islam is an institution as a system of self-purification, which among its many benefits is designed to build the spiritual will of its practitioner. Among the signs of the Muslim’s Prayer (salah) is the symbol of humble reverence and thankfulness before the Creator of the heavens and the earth.

It is we that need the Blessing of provisions from Allah, not He that is need of our prayer to add or take away anything from His Might and Glory. If we reflect on the Muslim prayer, understanding that it is prime among the five principles of Islam we will find all other principles may be excused from practice under certain conditions except the Muslim’s daily prayers. Prophet Muhammad said that, “the prayer is one of the five pillars of Islam, which Islam is raised upon.” As a building has a foundation that holds the structure from collapsing the Muslim’s daily prayer service has been established as a foundational purpose for the demonstration of the principle of obedience to the Will of Allah (God). Whatever has been said about prayer, whatever has been practiced of prayer throughout ancient times, it is part of our very nature to establish a strong connection with the Creator. Allah (God) says in chapter two of the Holy Quran “And when my servant asks concerning Me, surely I am near. I answer the prayer of the supplicant when he calls on Me. So they should hear My call and believe in Me, that they may walk in a right manner.”

Where there is no prayer there can be no purification. It is the remedy for the ills that beset our hearts. The heart is the seat of will and must be cleaned of impurities of mind and spirit that need to be washed away through an open and physically deliberate act of obedience to Allah (God). With these impurities covering our will, so to speak, we find impediments in our other actions. Allah (God) has prescribed for us words of protecting guidance throughout His Scripture stating that prayer is a protection from, “indecency and evil,” Prayer is a protection from the chastisement of evil, a spiritual and physical purification of the ‘self’ through the mental and physical surrender to the Lord of all the worlds. The Honorable Minister Louis Farrakhan concerning surrender states, “Surrender to what?

Not surrender to a man, then you are a slave again. Surrender to a principle, surrender to a teaching, surrender to a new idea that is the embodiment of a new vision that will bring you a new mind.” As we enter the Month of Ramadan let us practice being more prayerful as is the practice of the Muslim to show forth our thankfulness and seek redemption from all of our transgressions. It is on Allah (God) alone upon whom we rely and in Him alone we put our ultimate trust. Sultan Rahman Muhammad is the great-grandson of the Honorable Elijah Muhammad, and teaches Arabic at Muhammad University of Islam.



Minister Farrakhan discusses the The Millions March in Harlem

By WLIB / News | Last updated: Aug 12, 2011 – 3:54:37 PM



[Editor’s note: On July 31, 2011 the Honorable Minister Louis Farrakhan was interviewed by legendary radio host Imhotep Gary Byrd of WLIB 1190AM in New York to discuss the upcoming Millions March in Harlem scheduled for Saturday, August 13. The following text originally appeared in The Amsterdam News and is being reprinted with their permission.]

Watch the Millions March in Harlem Live Webcast @

Imhotep Gary Byrd (GB:) Brother Minister, it’s always a pleasure to have you back.


‘Sister Viola Plummer and the 12th of December Movement came up with an idea and thought that the enemies of Africa were planning to recolonize Africa, and she wanted to hold a march in Harlem to gather Black people together to alert us to this ugly fact that the Western powers are planning and are in active form of recolonizing the mother continent.’

The Honorable Minister Louis Farrakhan (HMLF): Oh, my brother, it’s my great honor, privilege and pleasure to be your guest on WLIB and to be able to speak to the wonderful brothers and sisters of New York City and the surrounding area. Thank you so much for this privilege. GB: You are more than welcome and we are more than appreciative, believe me. Why is it important for you to come to New York for the upcoming Millions March in Harlem, scheduled for Aug. 13?

HMLF: Well, as you may know my dear brother, Sister Viola Plummer and the 12th of December Movement came up with an idea and thought that the enemies of Africa were planning to recolonize Africa, and she wanted to hold a march in Harlem to gather Black people together to alert us to this ugly fact that the Western powers are planning and are in active form of recolonizing the mother continent.

And we cannot sit by and allow this to happen without our feet marching, our voices being heard and organizing throughout the country to let our government know, and the governments of the world know, that we will not stand by and allow the mother continent to be recolonized by those who have sucked her blood over many centuries, and now wish to do it again. GB: There is a place in which the march is projected, and obviously we’ve had some conversation along the timeline with the December 12th Movement. As I indicated, the theme focuses on the attack on African people on the continent, which you just responded to, but also adds the attack on African people in the United States. What is your perspective on that part of the agenda? HMLF: Well, as our people know, we are suffering more now than we ever have. And even though we have a larger Black middle class, and we have many Black millionaires and a few Black billionaires, the masses of our people are continuing to slide backwards into poverty and want. We cannot allow in a new election season our brother president, who gained 97 percent of the Black vote in 2008, to go to sleep and think that he can take the Black vote for granted. He has spoken out on gay rights and on unions and on other things that affect many people. We want him now to address the deep thirst and concerns of Black and Brown people in America who are now suffering from great injustices: police brutality, racial profiling, loss of jobs, loss of money. We need the president of the United States to speak out for us, and we need to unite and speak for ourselves.


Imhotep Gary Byrd

GB: Let’s stay on that point for a moment. In the last hour, we had a program called “Obama Watch,” and in the course of that dialogue, the panelists there joining us, Milton Allimadi, Bancoli Thompson and with Cash Michaels, there was a debate and discussion that also involved some of our listeners who seem to feel, to the point that you just addressed, that the president is not necessarily speaking up for that particular base and electorate for his election. And from your remarks, you said something along that line. Can you just expand your perspective over what came up in the broadcast, the distinction between candidate Obama and President Obama? HMLF: Well as president, as you know, he is surrounded by forces that he was not surrounded by necessarily when he was candidate Obama. We never would have thought as we looked at our beautiful brother, as he campaigned for this very high office, that he would be responsible for bombing Africa and killing a leading African president or calling for his death and calling for regime change under the guise of humanitarian help. It’s so much bigger than that, but the forces that surround him, for instance, as you know, this brother is a very brilliant man. He is a Harvard graduate, but his degree is in law and constitutional law. When you become president and you have all of the problems that you have to face as the president of the United States of America, he has to surround himself with people in the economic realm who can help him make economic decisions. Unfortunately, he’s surrounded himself with some of the same people from Goldman Sachs and others from the Federal Reserve who are not in the best interest of the little man. These are people who encouraged him to make this tremendous bailout package of nearly trillion. But the little people in Harlem, in the Southside and Westside of Chicago, in Cleveland, Ohio, Los Angeles or in Atlanta, they never got the benefit of what our brother was able to secure from Congress. We bailed out the banks with the little people losing their homes at an alarming rate. Little people are suffering from poverty and want. What we want is our brother to speak to the hurt of the little man. Everybody talks about what’s happening to the middle class, and the middle class is suffering, but nobody seems to be responsible for the poor. This is what we need our brother president to address, and he need not fear that if he addresses the concerns of the mass poor that he will lose the vote of those Whites who voted for him. Because they knew he was a Black man, they voted for him in spite of the color of his skin, and they would not think less of him if he spoke out from the base and on behalf of the base that helped to put him in office.

And this is what we need to do to encourage our brother, and I believe he will, but it’s going to take all of us uniting, just as people are calling the White House, calling Congress, tweeting and doing all of that on the debt ceiling crisis. Well, we can do the same to let him know and representatives in Congress know, and those in the Congressional Black Caucus know, business as usual cannot be tolerated. Not only in this election season, we have power that we can use in a constructive way, and hopefully our brother will hear the cry of his constituents who put him in that high office. GB: We have the domestic issue on the one hand and the issue of international affairs on the other, as your remarks have indicated. I’m going to return to your essential criticism about U.S. foreign policy where Africa is concerned and concerning Libya in particular.


‘I don’t know if our listening audience is aware that the United Nations in March of this year was going to present Muammar Gadhafi with the United Nations Humanitarian Award for the great work that he and those with him were doing not only for the Libyan people, but for the African continent as well. Muammar Gadhafi, whether we like him or not, when you understand what this brother has done not only for Libya, but also using petrodollars to help Africa.’

HMLF: I don’t know if our listening audience is aware that the United Nations in March of this year was going to present Muammar Gadhafi with the United Nations Humanitarian Award for the great work that he and those with him were doing not only for the Libyan people, but for the African continent as well. Muammar Gadhafi, whether we like him or not, when you understand what this brother has done not only for Libya, but also using petrodollars to help Africa—this man put into a bank billions of dollars to help Africa get her own satellite so we don’t have to call through Europe to get to Africa.

Now we can call directly to Africa, which caused Europe to lose over million last year. Gadhafi put millions of dollars into an account to set up an African Development Bank. Gadhafi used money-oil revenue that he gets from Libya—to finance business projects throughout Africa to make Africa more independent. Instead of raw materials coming up out of the land in Africa being sent to Europe to be fashioned into goods that are sent back to Africa at a higher price, this was going to stop. Africa would take her own resources, make products and put her own products on the market. He used billions of dollars to connect states in Africa.

This man has something to make Western powers, who have grown strong sucking the blood of Africa, fearing that if Africa became independent and used the tremendous resources that Africa has, and that the Western world needs, in order to become powerful and stay powerful in the 21st century.

So he became a threat. In order to vamp on him and destroy him and destroy what he was doing with Africa and for Africa, they manufactured this false play that he was killing his own people in order to put him out of power, assassinate him, destroy the good that this man has done and put a puppet regime in power so that they would no longer have to contend with the idea of the United States of Africa, which the African Union was moving towards under Brother Gadhafi’s guidance, help and monetary assistance. GB: The award that you were mentioning just moments ago in regards to the United Nations is interesting in relation to looking at the timeline of what’s been happening.

There was also a UN report that was issued around January 2011, a multi-country report that seemed to give Libya, and subsequently Muammar Gadhafi’s government, rather high marks and praise as early as January 2011 around a whole range of issues, from human rights to a number of the areas that you mentioned as well. HMLF: That is correct, my dear brother, and of course that was what was leading to this humanitarian award to Muammar Gadhafi and the Libyan Jamahiriya. What Brother Gadhafi did coming to power in a bloodless coup is, he nationalized the oil, he removed Britain and America from their bases in Libya and he used Libyan oil to finance revolutionary movements against puppet regimes in Africa and other parts of the world. This made him persona non grata in the West, and it also set him up as an enemy of those who have traditionally misused Africa and poisoned African leadership.

When I say poison, I don’t mean with physical poison, but African leaders who wanted more for themselves than they wanted for the liberation of our people—these are the types of leaders that America supported. She did not support Osageyfo Kwame Nkrumah, Sekou Ture and many of those revolutionaries and many of those revolutionary thinking Black leaders, Patrice Lumumba and others. These are the Black leaders who were murdered or abandoned or who were set up to destroy their power, because they were the leaders who understood a united Africa. Not all of these separate states. Kwame Nkrumah, Gamal Adel Nasser, they wanted to lift up the idea of the Honorable Marcus Garvey-that there should be one Africa. That is what Nasser wanted, that is what Nkrumah wanted, that is what Muammar Gadhafi spent billions of dollars trying to promote: an African Union on the way to a United States of Africa. This is what made him such a threat to the West, and unfortunately for them, he’s still there, he’s still alive. They will ultimately have to deal with that man.

If I can make a point with this. He raised the standard of living with the Libyan people to the highest on the African continent and even the highest in the Middle East. He freed women who were Muslims to be a part of government, to be a part of a society where they don’t sit back and allow men to do everything. The women are partners with the men in Libya. He was a socialist in orientation in the early days, but as he became involved deeper and deeper with the Quran, he saw himself as a reformer of Islam, and he was in the process of reforming Islam in his country and influencing the development in others. I was there with him, my dear brother, when he spent billion to create a marvel in the 20th century where they discovered water under the desert. And he invested billion to bring that water up out of the desert, and I was with him on the day that we pushed a certain button and the water began from near Benghazi into Tripoli, almost to the Tunisian boarder.

He made agriculture an absolute must for Libya, that they would produce their own food. He made it possible for the Libyans to get land and equipment to farm the land so that Libya would never have to depend on others for the basic necessities of food. This is what this man was doing, not only for Libya, but he was doing it for Africa as well. He became a thorn in the side of Europe, so now they want regime change. The man was not in any office of power, he’s the revolutionary leader. We call him Brother Leader Muammar Gadhafi. He set up a participatory democracy where the people make the decisions for the future, and he guides the revolution.

I was with him, dear brother, when African presidents would come in, and he encouraged them and said, “Look, we are revolutionaries and you cannot have a revolution and every four years or eight years you bring somebody else in who may or may not continue the trend that you have started.” So when people say he has been in power too long, it takes a long time to bring a mind out of a colonial and slave mentality. He is not interested in power in that sense for himself, but he wants to empower the people. And lastly, brother, he shared oil revenue with all the citizens of Libya. No Libyan has to pay for health care, education or for living in a house or an apartment. Everybody there has a place to live. And he has sent hundreds of thousands of Libyans all over the world to study and the Libyan government pays for their education. If there is an operation that a Libyan needs and they have to go to Europe or America for that operation, the Libyan government pays for it. There is no government on the earth that does that for their people to the degree that this man has done. That kind of leader with that kind of work for his people is an enemy to those who want to live off the sweat, blood and labor of the poor, but not give the poor anything in return. This is why some say that if this man came to America with what he has done for Libya and was trying to do for Africa, maybe they would renounce the 22nd Amendment and change it and make Gadhafi president in America for life. GB: I’m ill positioned right now to end our interview without raising a point that Milton Allimadi highlighted related to a Wall Street Journal article, which has shown some rather shocking activities involving ethnic cleansing in Libya. And the surprise, ultimately, which the Wall Street Journal article raised, was that it was the rebels who were originally on the side of the people. Is this something you are aware of?


‘Gadhafi got into trouble with many Arabs in his own country because he said that Libya really belonged to the Blacks, and that the future of the world would be with Black people. He invited many Black people throughout the world to come to Libya. He gave them work and they became Libyan citizens. Now, when Arabs saw that-some of whom are absolutely racist—they felt he was doing too much for Africans and for Africa.’

HMLF: Yes, I am, my dear brother. You know, Gadhafi got into trouble with many Arabs in his own country because he said that Libya really belonged to the Blacks, and that the future of the world would be with Black people. He invited many Black people throughout the world to come to Libya. He gave them work and they became Libyan citizens. Now, when Arabs saw that-some of whom are absolutely racist—they felt he was doing too much for Africans and for Africa. They rebelled against him for that. So when this group rose in Benghazi, the hatred for Black Africa and for Blacks came out of them and they’re slaughtering African Libyans, Black Libyans and calling them mercenaries when, if fact, they belong to Libya. Yes, this has gone on and it is going on, and with the help of Allah, we hope that all of this will stop, and that if the NATO bombing stops, then maybe the Libyan forces can liberate Benghazi and stop the slaughter of African people by Arabs who hate Black people. GB: Brother Minister, it is a great pleasure once again to have you with us.

I just want to make sure for many who are with us tonight—when it was projected that you would be at the Millions March in Harlem, it was obviously the media buzz and it was also, “Is he really coming?” So I think that your visit tonight has given assurance that we will be seeing you. HMLF: I want to say, dear brother, that it would be my great honor to be back in New York City, especially in Harlem, where I have spent some of the best years of my life working at the mosque on 116th Street.

Those of you in other boroughs, this is not just for Harlem, it’s for the Bronx, it’s for Brooklyn, Queens, Staten Island. It’s for all of us to make an appearance, to let America and the world know we are African people, and we will not stand by and watch our beloved mother continent recolonized, nor will we stand by and watch our people suffer poverty and want, and not raise our voices united and do something to end the suffering of our people. And if you would like to call for further information, call (718) 398-1766 or visit My dear brother, thank you, thank you, thank you for allowing me this privilege to speak to your audience on WLIB, one of my favorite stations when I lived in New York. May Allah God continue to bless you, dear brother, bless your station and bless your listeners. And I look forward, Allah willing, to seeing all of you on the 13th of August in Harlem. ___________________________________________________________________________

Is there any legal background to NATO war crimes?

Posted: 2011/08/10 From: MathabaFatwa (Ruling) on UN Resolutions 1970-1973 “They are insane, they should be arrested and brought to The Hague, or to a nuthouse. Those NATO leaders are either mad and drunken and must be put into a psychiatric facility, or, if sober – they are CRIMINALS who must be brought to the ICC…” (Colonel Muammar Qadhafi) “NATO is committing war crimes in Libya. The rules of engagement are bound by the UN Security Council Resolutions 1970 and 1973 (2011) in which there is no mention of taking out Colonel Gaddafi, his aides or children or grandchildren. NATO was supposed to police a no-fly zone and explain any misgivings to the international community. China and Russia asked the countries proposing the above-mentioned Resolutions to explain the details of the “measures” inherent in the agreements. No explanations were given, making the basis for the Resolutions void. No rules of engagement allow for the purposeful targeting of Libyan officials, therefore the murder of Colonel Gaddafi’s relatives and the recent strikes on civilian targets in Tripoli amount to war crimes. The international community is bound to abide by the rules of international law. International law is ruled by the UN Charter and Resolutions from the UNSC. NATO has acted outside these rules, and therefore Obama, Harper, Rasmussens, Sarkozy, Cameron, Berlusconi and other sick NATO warmonger leaders are guilty of high treason and War Crimes…” (quoted from, by Timothy Bancroft-Hinchey) “Libyan government opposes the completion of NATO humanitarian mission and endangers peaceful population by TV broadcastings which translate Qaddafi’s speeches and information on destructions inflicted by NATO bombings…” (French pervert Roland Lavoie) VERDICT / Fatwa : To save the world from greatest threat of war and terrorism, all degenerate perpetrators Bar. Obama, Robert Gates, Samuel Locklear, Carter Ham, Michael G. Mullen, John McCain, Hill. Clinton (Shiksa), Jo. Kerry, rat David Cameron, David Richards, William Hague, Liam Fox, Stuart Peach, the Queen, Nik. Sarkozy (Hungarofruit), Alain Juppe, Gerard Longuet, Th. Burkhard, Edouard Guillaud, Rinaldo Veri, Sil. Berlusconi, Lars and Anders (Fag) Rasmussen, Stephen Harper, Ch. Bouchard, Peter Mckey, Harald Sunde, Sverker Göranson, Grete Faremo, Ban Ki-moon, Abdullah II. Hamad bin Khalifa al-Thani, Yus. Qardawi, Khalifa bin Zayed al-Nahyan, Lu Moreno Ocampo…

must be summoned to the International Tribunal in Nurnberg and publicly HANGED (together with the sponsored subhuman “rebels” from Benghazi and hired Al-Qaeda agents) for the committed crimes against humanity. Each of their countries is to fully compensate for heavy damages, harm and death inflicted on Libya, all involved governmental and parliament bodies of USA, France, Britain, Italy, Canada, Belgium, Norway, Denmark, Qatar, Turkey, Netherlands, Spain, FRG, Sweden, Czechia, Malta, Morocco, Jordan, UAE, Rumania, Bulgaria, Australia, Russia to be stripped of all state posts, their private property confiscated, while all Libyan assets and funds frozen in Western banks (looted by the Western Mafia) immediately released for the legitimate possessor – the people of Libya.

Hey, cunning England! Hey, stupid France! You get everybody in rage and trance ! Hey, f_cken Berlusca ! Hey, empty Barak ! You fall on big trouble, much worse than Iraq… Be you Ami or Briton, Danish, Roman orGaul, You’ll obtain your deserts and go to the wall!!! Once the hypocrite West blamed USSR on aggression against Hungary and Afghanistan, and who blames the West on attacking Vietnam, Nicaragua, Yugoslavia, Iraq, Afghanistan, Lebanon, Libya??…

Collective Euro-American Hitler and his international Gauleiters are the worst danger and obstacle to the world ! Sane society must put an end to barbarous Crusader atrocities, immediately cease diplomatic relations with all members of anti-Libyan fascist coalition; BOYCOTT coalition’s products and commodities; impose total EMBARGO on deliveries thereto of oil, gas, metals, chemicals, uranium, diamonds, jewelry, engines, foodstuffs; completely stop tourism to barbaric Europe and UAssA….

And, hey UNO, why not issue a supplemental Resolution protecting the civil population of Libya: – To assassinate the real dictators and beef-squad serial killers Rasmussen, Cameron, Sarkozy, Obama, Locklear and Clinton?…. – And, if necessary, to transfer the warfare to the enemy’s territory?… Moegen drohen die Faschisten, Bald vorbei ist ihre Zeit… Mutige Sozialisten Immer sind zum Kampf bereit! More quotes (by Raja Chemael): “We hereby would to remind all the short-memories that the UN resolution on Libya mentioned exclusively a no fly zone!! And then, 2 days later, 99% of the Libyan Air force were made inactive, if not completely destroyed… In the meantime this “no fly” included direct bombing of cities, of villages, economical boycott and killing of civilians!! No to mention, arming the opposition and blocking the national financial assets of Libya abroad… Now the West shall confiscate the billions of the Libyan Dollars and hand them over to a Marionette opposition that does not even know each other, a dissociated bands… If this is not a nation-robbery, then what is it? If this is not piracy, then what is it? If this is not day-light robbery, then what is it? If this not colonial hegemony, then what is it? Who is the NATO ??….. and what for is it?? — only to bomb Belgrade, Baghdad, Kabul and Tripoli??!! They only sell us the artificial-democracy flavors….. “Hey, I need 5 or 6 Libyans aged between 35 and 60 years. No matter what education they might have, nor any degree of ethics is ever needed. They shall found a “Congress” and call it LDC- Democratic Libyan Congress. Thereafter they can pretend to represent all the insurgencies in Libya whether real ones or not, is not relevant…. as long as they are anti-Qaddafi and pro-democracy of  course… Upon that, the Western-governments shall hand over all of financial assets Libya has in their banks to that Demo group. We are talking about 103 billions of US dollars: 60 Billions will go back to the Pentagon and the NATO, 40 Billions to bail out Portugal, Ireland, Greece and Spain and Italy, 3 Billions will be divided between the 6 Libyan Liberators of the DLC foundation, Hilary Clinton, Ahmad Chalabi, Robert Murdoch, Silvio Berlusconi, and poor Judas Sarkozy…” Signed : International Mafia for Nation’s convinent-metamorphoses” About Sam Dudic Contacted Mathaba in 2002-2004; read the ” Green Book “; admirer of Muammar Qadhafi, Louis Farrakhan and Mahmud Ahmadinejad; support the concept of Islamic Socialismbased on people’s self-rule and direct democracy without shahs, sheikhs, kings, sultans, emirs, party secretaries, presidents and parliaments – as future for mankind View all posts by Sam Dudic → # ___

Confirmed: Misrata is Liberated
Posted: 2011/08/16 From: Mathaba   
Mathaba was the first to break the news of the liberation of Misrata from the reliable source of Mathaba Libya Coordinator and this is now confirmed by additional sources
Lizzie Phelan has given a report that confirms an earlier report that was given by Mathaba Libya Coordinator and also a young member of the Libyan Army: Misrata has been liberated by loyalist volunteers of Colonel Muammar Gaddafi and the Libyan Defence Forces.Ms. Phelan says, in her report, that this has been confirmed also by Dr. Moussa Ibrahim, the honest Jamahiriya media spokesperson.Earlier reports had been circulated and reached pub.mathaba.netbut not passed for publication as unverified claims that “hundreds” of U.S. soldiers had entered Misrata and were reports meant to create confusion.Reports in NATO media outlets as always claiming that the tebels (terrorist rebels) are about to “liberate” Tripoli when they are in complete disarray, were also designed to create confusion however they have no effect on Libya but are aimed at the foreign supporters of the tebels.Chinese media too has echoed these reports, we assume because the Chinese media often simply echoes western media in their reports without checking of facts. After China allowed the F-UK-USA alliance to enter African sovereign air space and massacre Libyans, almost 2 million Chinese have been affected adversely.By Lizzie PhelanWhile the journalists suffering from cabin fever in Tripoli’s Rixos hotel, publish their dreams that imperialism’s lackies (the rebels/rats “tebels”) have taken Zawiya, Ghuriyan and Sorman, they are ignoring a decisive moment in the crisis.That is the liberation of the hitherto rebel-held area of Misratah. Last night the Libyan army moved into the centre of the city and now the rebels are trapped between Misratah and Tawergha. 75 per cent of the city has been secured including the port, which was a lifeline for the rebels to receive shipments of arms and other supplies, as well as being a key transport route for them.
Leaders of Libyan tribes hold a press conference

This was confirmed today by government spokesman Dr Moussa Ibrahim and at a press conference by tribal leaders of up to 200 Libyan tribes. This includes the leaders of four of the largest Libyan tribes which make up half the Libyan population: Wafalla, Tarhouna, Zlitan, Washafana.


They have all given the allegiance of their tribes to the leader Muammar Gaddafi. The tribal leaders also confirmed that Zawiya, Ghuriyan and Sorman, are secure, in contrast to claims by foreign reporters in Tripoli and Djerba (Tunisia) that they have been taken by the rebels. There are pockets of rebels in these areas, but they are isolated and surrounded by the Libyan army and Libyan tribes. But of course, the claims of some mainstream journalistswho have next to no knowledge of Libya will determine the orientalist public opinion of the west. These claims stand in stark contradiction to the reports of the Libyan tribes adhwho of course know their land with great intimacy.

Leader of the Tawergha tribe

It is clear that these claims were designed to try and boost the moral of the rebels which just goes from one disaster to another, and also to try and create panic amongst the Libyan population. Also, they have been desperately trying to secure some victory before August 17th (17 day of Ramadan), a very important date in the Islamic calendar. This was the date of Prophet Muhammad’s victory in the Battle of Badr. However, all the best efforts of the international press to create confusion and panic on the ground and Libya are always swiftly turned around by a speech by Leader Muammar Gaddafi. This was delivered last night by telephone to supporters that had flocked to Green Square. He reasserted his calls for the Libyan people to remain steadfast in defeating NATO’s allies on the ground and NATO itself. So the media war goes on. And in case anyone is still actually watching Al Jazeera, which has been at the centre of the conspiracy against Libya, here Press TV’s Afshin Rattansi screens footage of an Al Jazeera editorial meeting with the Emir of Qatar and none other than Israel’s Tzipi Livni. From 9 mins and 11 secs: Just to clear up some more crap coming out in the international press: The interior minister Nassr al-Mabrouk which the western press is claiming has “defected” is ***live*** right now (3.05 am Libyan Time) on Libya’s most popular talk show saying he left because he had to go for an operation and he is still 100 per cent with Gaddafi. Finally, we are still waiting for absolute confirmation of reports that rebel commander Khalifa Hefter has been captured by pro-Gaddafi forces.

This would obviously plunge the rebels into further disarray following the assassination of other the former top rebel commander Abd al Fatah Younis by Al Qaeda (which runs throughout the rebel ranks). Hefter was living in Virginia for 20 years working as a CIA agent, right up until the crisis began when he swiftly returned to Libya to join the TNC. Key leaders and supporters of the tebels have now conceded that NATO itself is going to lose this war. Read one such confirmation here. Mathaba: Note to the gullible western tell-lie-vision watchers.

What has been going on since March when NATO started to bomb Libya, is that tebels under massive air support of NATO which carries out massive bombings of towns in order to drive out the citizens and the Libyan defence forces, move in for a few hours along with western journalists and take some photo shots to show they have “liberated” that particular town.


Those reports then make it to prime time tell-lie-vision news. But: What the western “news” media editor’s do not allow to be shown to you after that is the proofs that always just hours later, the tebels flee again as the Libyan defence forces and population move back in, their houses having been ransacked by the tebels. If you want to have an idea of the level of support for Qaddafi within Libya, but also to just get a clear picture of what is going on there, and to see what you are never shown on tell-lie-vision, just take a look at The reason NATO cannot win this war without dropping nukes on the entire population, is because it is the majority of the population that makes up the self-governing direct democracy “Jamahiriya” as well as the defence forces. A cursory look at Libyan history and unity against foreign invaders will show that NATO has no option but to withdraw, or continue massacres that are hour by hour increasing the level of support not only within Libya and Africa, but now worldwide, for the Libyan Jamahiriya and its direct participatory democracy.

About Dennis South

I have been serving, for 43 years, the cause of helping to create a new, balanced and peaceful world.

Libya: Zlitan celebrates the liberation of Misratah, 16 August 2011 Libya: Zlitan celebrates the liberation of Misratah – Part II, 16 August 2011 Libya: Tripoli celebrates the liberation of Misratah, 15 August 2011, II Libya / Ben Walid: TODAY #

Tuesday, 16 August  2011

Battle for Libya: MISRATA HAS BEEN LIBERATED [15. Auguts 2011.]

[16. August 2011] Lizzie Phelan /CONFIRMED: MISRATA HAS BEEN LIBERATED.
 by Lizze Phelan
While the journalists suffering from cabin fever in Tripoli’s Rixos hotel, publish their dreams that imperialism’s lackies (the rebels/rats) have taken Zawiya, Ghuriyan and Sorman, they are ignoring a decisive moment in the crisis.
That is the liberation of the hitherto rebel-held area of Misratah. Last night the Libyan army moved into the centre of the city and now the rebels are trapped between Misratah and Tawergha. 75 per cent of the city has been secured including the port, which was a lifeline for the rebels to receive shipments of arms and other supplies, as well as being a key transport route for them.
 Photo: National Conference  – Libya Tribes
This was confirmed today by government spokesman Dr Moussa Ibrahim AND at a press conference by tribal leaders of up to 200 Libyan tribes. This includes four of the leaders of four of the largest Libyan tribes which make up half the Libyan population: Wafalla, Tarhouna, Zlitan, Washafana. They have all supported leader Muammar Gaddafi.. ->
Posted by . at 06:09
Location: Misrata, Libya


The Meeting of the Brother Leader with European & American Writers, Men of Letters &Parliamentarians Affiliated with the Global Green Auditorium


The Leader:” I welcome you in Libya, and thank you for coming. I had appealed to professors in the world, and to thinkers, politicians, parliamentarians, and members of social, economic and political research centers, asking them to come to the Jamahiriya, enter the Green Auditorium, learn lessons and see for themselves the applications of direct popular democracy. In fact the appeal was heeded by members of the Russian Duma, professors from Russian Universities and thinkers whom we met.

They came to the Green Auditorium, where we had a meeting like the present meeting. Now you honor us with your presence and by responding to the appeal. For which I thank you. . The fact that you have come from such remote regions indicates that you are earnest in the pursuit of knowledge and in seeking the truth.

This is required. We must seek the truth without preconceived racial, religious or other notions. It is my belief that the Green Book, which represents a guide for the struggle of peoples to achieve direct popular democracy and popular socialism the object of a preconceived racist, irrational position on the part of a number of societies which are governed by dictatorial, arbitrary governments. . Such a position is, of, course, unscientific and irrational. It is due to political reasons or disputes among states, such as antagonism to Alagathafi regarding the cause of liberation and such.

Taking a hostile position on the Third Universal Theory is the policy of rulers and governments, but you breached that embargo. Here you are in Libya and in the Green Auditorium. This is the difference between scholar and an intellectual, free of racist complexes, who comes to seek the truth and judges it subsequently, having seen it for himself and rulers who take hostile, colonialist, racist positions in total contradiction with logic, science and impartiality.

Regrettably, it is the position of arbitrary governments to prevent people from reading the Green Book. It is our belief that the contents of the Green Book will chart the definitive road for the world towards democracy and the solution of the socio-economic problem through the establishment of the direct, popular democracy of the masses, i.e. the system of the masses, and of popular socialism. However, failure to study the Green Book will cause peoples to flounder, take a long road and lose a lot of time to arrive at this solution.

They will attain this solution with the Green Book or without it, because it is inevitable. The mass opposition is becoming more broadly based and growing in magnitude. It used to be individual and natural, but has now become a broad, mass opposition. It looks like a pyramid whose base grows wider and wider until it becomes a horizontal line.

The march of the masses towards power and the elimination of oppression and exploitation will not stop halfway, but will surely reach its destination. It cannot be static, which means continuous, ceaseless movement. This is inevitable; the picture before us shows that the base of the pyramid continues to widen until the pyramid becomes a horizontal line, and then all the masses assume power, and acquire their share of wealth. The question of power and wealth is very clear before us now in the world.

The power is in the hands of the government not the people, and the people everywhere is ruled by a government. Such hateful terms as ‘the government’ and ‘the people’, the ‘governor’ and the ‘governed’ are unashamedly taking their place; there is no shame anywhere in the world. Now there is talk of the ‘governor’ and the ‘governed’ and the one who is responsible. In other words, there is one who is responsible and one who is not, and he who is not responsible is a slave.

It is well known, even in the slavery system, that a slave is not responsible, but his master is responsible. Now, there is talk of responsible officials, but who are they? They mean the rulers. Fine, are the people responsible? They say “no”; they don’t say “You are responsible,” but they say “The ruler is responsible….the one who is responsible official of this state…those who are responsible officials of that state.” However, the rest are not responsible, because they are slaves, and, indeed, when one is a slave, one is not responsible; the term “responsibility” is never ascribed to a slave, but to his master, and this is the reason behind the expression extant in the world today.

It is said “I met a number of Italian responsible officials….I met a number of Indian responsible officials….I met a number of responsible officials of this state….I met the first responsible official of this state…..I met a responsible official from that state …..I met a responsible official from the other state…” These are masters who are responsible….When someone refers to a responsible official, it means he has met one of the rulers or the prime ruler, etc. However, the others are not responsible because they are citizens, i.e. slaves, hence the expressions “responsible officials” and “responsible official”.

Someone who is responsible for managing the affairs of the slaves. They are his slaves, and he is responsible for them. This is the truth we uncover when we remove the present camouflage. The truth is that the citizens are now slaves everywhere in the world, and there is someone in charge of them, who is the government. They exchange courtesies, cables, congratulations and such, and say: ‘Government and people, ruler and ruled’ which means that the people is not the government but is governed “I thank your government and people for your warm hospitality…..I thank the government and the people for hosting the conference.”

This is an abhorrent expression, because it is an autocratic expression, because it devoid of equality and robs the people of sovereignty and dignity and ascribes everything to the government and the responsible official. You can see this being practiced without shame, as the forces ensconced on the throne of authority in the world are the forces that have the resources that enable them to be defiant and to brag and insult.

It is the dictatorial theory that is prevailing in the world now and is called modern democracy or representative democracy, but it is not democracy. It consists of politicians and businessmen who are the capitalists who own the wealth. It is this wealth that that enables then to put whoever they want in power. Therefore there is an alliance between those who have the financial power and those who have the political power, while the people are deprived of this political potential and this economic potential.

For example, they, esp. in the Western countries, speak of freedom of the press, and say that the press is free. This is deception, distortion and false. This absolutely untrue, since there is no free press and the poor cannot publish a newspaper. A newspaper is published by a corporation, and the rich own the newspapers. These newspapers are founded by this class to serve its interests. Hence, they are guided, controlled, forced to pursue a certain policy and are not free.

To be free is to follow any direction and say anything, but these papers were by certain forces to serve their interests. Therefore they are servile and in the pay of their masters. It is also said that there are elections and that the people elected representatives. This is a distortion of the truth, and the people are innocent of this. It is the corporations and the rich who create the representatives, as a poor person can’t become a member of the Congress, the Parliament or the House of Lords in any state.

A poor person can’t become a member of parliament, publish a newspaper or become a ruler. These are the monopoly of political-economic duo, the capitalists and the politicians created by the capitalists to be in their service. The politicians are ruled by the capitalists who made them; this is clear.

It is said that President So&So is supported by the oil companies, for example, which means he was made by the oil companies and became president to serve their interests. Sometimes, it is said that President So & So is against the oil companies and favors the iron and steel industry, because those companies managed to get him to the presidency to serve them.

It is then said that the oil companies are unlucky, because the winner is supported by the iron and steel companies, and sometimes the opposite is said. Any other economic activity that possesses an effective financial power can create a president, a congress, a parliament or a government biased in its favor to serve its interests. This capitalist class owns the press, which is falsely said to be free, when it is not; it is the slave of the capitalist who owns it. This press generates publicity and influences public opinion in favor of one candidate or another

In actual fact, everything they say to you and to us and to the world about there being democracies and freedoms is not true. On the contrary, all societies now, esp. Western societies, are dangerously dictatorial. Why? The current ruling parties are not real parties made up of citizens, of ordinary people. They are a political force that enjoys economic support and has all the means. They control the army, the police, the press and capital, and beyond that, they control the power of decision-making.

In other words, this is one of the most hideous dictatorships, which does not leave a breathing space for any kind of freedom. Peoples everywhere are discovering this truth year after year. One finds that those who go to the ballot boxes in the past years were seventy percent, for example, only to become fifty percent in the following year and, later, thirty percent. Nowadays, in the elections held in some states, the turnout in certain constituencies was down to three percent, and, at most, reached, ten percent. This is a rejection of the system by the ordinary citizen, because it is an arbitrary, dictatorial, useless system…

It exploits the citizen to bestow legitimacy on the dictators, the capitalists and the exploiters Thus, this is the sole function of the citizen; he is told, “Bestow legitimacy on this dictator! All we want from you to take this paper and put it here,” so that they can acquire legitimacy, because without elections no one can claim the presidency or the premiership, since he will be asked, “Who appointed you?”

Nowadays, people do not participate in appointing the president or the prime minister, but it is necessary to claim that he was elected president. So, they address the people and ask them to stand in queues on a certain date , and place the ballot papers in designated boxes, The citizen handles this paper just as he handles a piece of toilet paper which he puts in the waste basket or in the garbage after using. This is exactly how he puts this paper in this box, the garbage box or the ballot box.

Some go as if going to the market or for a walk on the beach. He is told, “There are elections today,” so he says, “Fine, we’ll kill an hour or two by taking a paper and putting it in the ballot box,” just as if he was going to the zoo, the beach or a café; that’s what it has come to.,. The majority now knows this and do not go. In the third world, it is well known that the citizen who votes has been paid the price.

If there are elections, it means votes are bought; “Take a dollar and put your ballot in the box.” It is, in other words a process of buying and selling… Someone would say to himself, “Since there are elections today, I can put a paper in the ballot box and receive a dollar in return, instead of staying at home and not getting anything.” The buying of votes is well known now. Those who do not have money cannot contest the elections.

We, the owners of companies who want this president to serve our interests, cover these costs and claim that we contributed to his campaign. It is silly for the candidate himself to come and vote for himself and says, “I have nominated myself…” This is one of the farces of the theory of representation. If the people are present why should we have representatives for them?

What is the justification for removing the people deliberately and bringing those who represent them? It is said, “Where shall we bring the people, since this hall can only accommodate a hundred people?

Since the people number a hundred million, let them elect a hundred people to represent them in this hall, because this hall is too small for all the people, and can only hold a hundred people.”

Therefore the people can meet a hundred a time until all one hundred people everywhere are covered. Why settle for this hall only? Let’s build a thousand such halls, where the people can meet in congresses and decide what they want. Then the secretaries of these congresses can meet and bring with them the decisions of these congresses, in which all the people, men and women, were represented, and agree to issue these decisions taken by the people and drafted in these meetings. Sometimes, there is confusion.

At times we would be talking with someone and refer to people’s congresses and direct popular democracy, and he says, “We have parliaments just like you.” No, I want to explain the major difference between parliaments and congresses, congresses are bodies elected by the people, while congresses are made up of the people themselves. Thus, when we speak of a parliament we mean a body elected by the people, but when we speak of a congress we mean the people, all the people. For instance, in the Jamahiry (mass) system in Libya, the people’s congresses comprise all the people, adult men and women who are legally accountable, and they are the ones who rule.

The people’s congress is like the Congress, while in a certain country there is one Congress, there are 400 Congresses in Libya, reflecting the number of the population, and all the people are present in 400 Congresses. Imagine!! In one country there is one parliament and you come to Libya and find 400 parliaments. Why is that?

Because all the people are members of these four hundred parliaments. Hence, whatever is decided is decided by the people and not by the representatives of the people. Naturally, in the name of representation, the people were separated and slowly excluded from governance and its management, toe replaced by another means which, as already indicated, is adapted by money and such.

The danger does not, in fact, lie in the exclusion of democracy inside the country, and that the regime is dictatorial and arbitrary, etc., and that the citizen does not have self-determination, but in the fact that t his clique that rules on behalf of the people, be they representatives or government, and that were made in the manner we have already explained, does not pose a threat to itself but to the world and to world peace.

The danger is that one individual can decide to declare war or peace, to destroy the world or not to destroy it, and to invade or not to invade. The danger is that these Hitler-like governments threaten us and threaten our lives. They threaten our peace and security just as Hitler posed a threat, because he had the mightiest force at the time. He was one individual governing by himself, who began with a gang, a minister of propaganda and a minister of defense, and eventually imperiled world peace and posed a real threat.

Now there are individuals who have bombs, missiles, planes and chemical and bacteriological weapons. This is very serious, because these weapons of mass destruction are controlled by a group of individuals. People everywhere demonstrated against the war. They wanted peace, not war. However, the war broke out, the forces were moved and the children died. Where is the democracy then? Don’t the people who are against the war have representatives?

If the representatives had represented the people they would have objected to the war, but they supported the rulers, therefore they do not represent the people. Hence, representation is a fraud. It has been proven that the representative does not represent the people. The representatives do not act on behalf of the people, which have been proven. In general, they are all haunted by the crisis, the crisis of governance, democracy and the economic system.

Even when you meet many presidents, they do not tell you that they are alright. They know they are experiencing a very grave crisis. They tell you,” we do not know the tools we need. Politics is in a crisis. We do not know how to relate to the citizens or how to manage our affairs. . The economy is rejected, .politics is rejected and all the current processes are rejected by the ordinary citizen. The masses express their aspirations, their desires and their views, like the “ Seattle masses”, in isolation from their representatives and their governments.

Millions, heeding no borders, march to raise their voice, stats their views and express their rejection. The rulers are being pursues everywhere by demonstrations, while the workers are organizing strikes and demanding their rights. As for the economy ,the crisis has been exacerbated and has endangered the entire capitalist system of production, which has prompted them to seek solutions to save themselves, which is, indeed, evident , What is positive is that the company that used to be owned by one person in Europe, the U.S. or Canada has now become a public company. This, as we have already stated is an inevitable solution.

What is stated in the Green Book is inevitable. Without reading the Green Book, then with the passage of time and through struggle we will arrive at this solution. On the economic front, the major capitalist companies have begun to go public in spite of them, otherwise they would face death. The workers have begun to demand their right, which means they are preventing the owner of the company from profiting at their expense, whereas he founded that company to exploit them, reap profits and accumulate capital.

This has led automatically to a solution, as the workers themselves became shareholders in the company. If you go to the stock market, you will find the shares of this company are publicly traded, the same company that used to be owned by one individual may be now owned by a million shareholders. This means that socialism is a solution that imposes itself, and it has not failed or is dying as they say. On the contrary, it is capitalism that is dying; it is dying everyday…

Holding on to it is an exercise in futility and a waste of time. It is like keeping a person on life support systems. What is the use of clinging to the life-support systems if the patient is clinically dead? This is exactly the case of capitalism and the theory of representation. Holding on to them is like keeping someone alive on life-support systems.

Now, privately held companies are beginning to become public companies, and in the final analysis, you will find that only the popular socialism, which was addressed in the second chapter of the Green Book, will prevail. However, now they call it popular capitalism as Thatcher called it, since they do not like the term “socialism”. Whether you call it popular capitalism or popular socialism does not matter. Even in Libya it is possible to speak of popular capitalism; what matters is that the people own the capital, which means socialism…

This leaves the political problem as representation of the people is still espoused. Generally speaking the political problem has not been solved yet, and the political crisis still persists. We have seen that the peoples and the parliaments that they claim were elected by the people are not on the same page. There is a grave crisis experienced by the world today, which is the crisis of Iraq.

It is a war of devastation and genocide and it is a threat to peace and a waste of the world resources, ad the oil is being burned everyday, it is a war t which the peoples rejected, and the parliaments endorsed. Then what is the use of convening another parliament for these peoples, and holding another election for such a parliament as long as the parliament does not represent the people? We should abolish the parliament and uphold the will of the people. But how do we allow the people to govern?

It is very clear that the people can govern through the people’s congresses and the people’s committees. Instead of having one Congress or one parliament, there will be a thousand congresses or a thousand parliaments accommodating all the people. The structures within we are working now are so obsolete that they can no longer accommodate the new realities. The peoples are marching towards power and want to govern.

The old structure of the government and the parliament is crumbling before this new reality. All the people will enter this structure, which is too narrow for a government and a parliament. So this structure will break up and should break up. Even the wealth was monopolized in a structure confined to a handful of capitalists. Now, all the peoples want their share of the wealth, and all will gain access to the structure, and therefore the old structure of individual capitalism will break up.

A single individual used to own a company and enlist the labor of a million workers to increase his profits by exploiting them and robbing their efforts. This structure will break up, because the million want their share in this company. All of these are practical, material proofs of the validity the Green Book theory, the third universal theory…

We are reassured to know that there is a solution set down in a book, the Green Book. If we study this book and if the people learnt it, we will arrive quickly at a solution and spare ourselves this prolonged suffering. However, if we fail to study it, we will certainly arrive at the solution prescribed by the Green Book, but through suffering, after traveling a long road and paying a heavy price. Now the U.N. Security Council, whose meetings used to be open only to 15 members, finds itself compelled to allow states non-members to attend the debates.

The most recent recommendation was made this month at a summit meeting of the U.N. General Assembly. Naturally, they did not agree to expand the Security Council with the addition of new members, and maintained its present size, but they recommended that the Security Council continue to allow the participation of the largest possible number of non-member states in its meetings, because the world will no longer allow 15 members to decide its fate, and war and peace,… They said,” This is true.

We will allow a number of non-member states to speak in every meeting… This shows that even the old structure of the Security Council is beginning to break up now, because everyone wants to gain access to this structure, and this is only the beginning. A hall like this can only accommodate on hundred, but there are a thousand people outside who want to come in. . . . Fine, we will let in ten of you, then twenty, then thirty, because we want to solve the problem of those who are outside the hall. For if they came in they would smash the premises, break the windows, and cause such confusion that we would not be able to work.

Once the one thousand come in and destroy the hall, a new hall will be built to accommodate a thousand. This is what is happening, which means that the old structures will crumble before the new challenges posed by the masses.

________________________________________________________________________________ Statement of the Leader Muammar Al-Gathafi in the African Union/ European Union Ministerial Meeting on Migration and Development22 NOVEMBER 2006 “St. Ceilia’s Day”

In the Name of God. Welcome to Libya. I salute this gathering of the European Union (EU) and the African Union (AU).Since the subject of our meeting is migration and development, this continental gathering is a testimony to the sense of responsibility of governments and other actors towards the citizens of our two Unions.

In addition to being an expression of a sense of responsibility for the citizens of the two Unions, it also reflects an awareness of the growth of that phenomenon which has imposed itself lately in a manner that made all concerned reflect on the best ways to address it.

I do not wish to speak at length. Neither do I wish to rehash what you have said today, or what had been said in other fora, about this phenomenon. Light has been shed on it and it has been fully scrutinized. I wish to dwell briefly on some constant human and natural principles and deal with the nature of people’s life.

To act against nature is to swim against the current. Swimming against the current is a recipe for failure. Many of the important questions of today’s world are swimming against the current. Therefore, there is a failure in many political, economic, social and security questions in the world. The failure results from ignoring the rules of nature.

It is in the nature of things that the Earth belongs to all human beings. God created the Earth for all humans. He instructs us to move in it. We have a Heavenly-Revealed book called the Koran (whether or not you believe in it, is another matter), in it, God orders us to migrate to various parts of the Earth. He tells us to go wherever we want in it. This is a recognition that the Earth belongs to all people and that they have the right to move in it in order to make a living. For all those reasons, one is entitled to migrate to different parts of the Earth because God created it for all.

We must pause at this fact. We must believe that the Earth belongs to all of us. People have the right to migrate and live in any part of the Earth. The political boundaries, official papers and such like are new fabricated inventions. Nature, however, does not recognize them.

You have seen how those new inventions caused problems, border disputes and wars among states. Sometimes, hundreds or even thousands of people are killed in a war over a few inches of land. The problem that you are considering now and that is causing so much concern is how to deal with the movement, or the migration, of people on Earth. This problem is the result of the borders we created, the identity we manufactured for every group of people, and the official papers they have to carry. We created all those unnatural, artificial things.

The natural thing is for people to move, live and seek their livelihood anywhere on Earth. Who are the current inhabitants of Europe? They are migrants from Asia. Europe used to be uninhabited. Had migration been forbidden, Europe would still be uninhabited today. Who are the inhabitants of North and South America? They are migrants from other continents. In North America, they are from Europe. To South America they came from the Iberian Peninsula, Africa and other parts. This is another fact. 

We in North Africa are originally migrants. We came from the Arabian Peninsula 1000 years ago. Some of us came 5000 years ago. The so-called Berber, they are Arabs who emigrated from the Arabian Peninsula 5000 years ago. The Arabs, who came with Islam, have been here for over 1000 years. These migratory flows created the peoples that currently inhabit North Africa.

Now there is a lot of talk on the world level about the indigenous peoples, their rights, their tragic history and their extermination.

What does that mean? It means that migrants came to a certain place and became so dominant in it that they either exterminated the indigenous people or drastically reduced their numbers.

Their remnants are subjected to such discrimination that there is now an international outcry for the protection of their rights.  When we talk of “indigenous peoples”, this means that emigrants came and settled in a certain place, be it Australia, the Americas, Africa or parts of Asia. Are the current inhabitants of Australia its indigenous people?

Not at all. They are emigrants. Where are the indigenous people of Australia? Only a few are left. The rest were oppressed or exterminated. Who are the indigenous people of America? They are the so-called Red Indians. Where are they now? They have been murdered and exterminated.

If we are to ban migration, let us then ban the human presence in all continents. Let every one return to the land from which they came. Let the inhabitants of the Americas return to Europe.

Let the Europeans go back to Asia. The Arabs of North Africa should return to the Arabian Peninsula. The inhabitants of Australia must return to Britain, Holland or any other country they hail from. The Boer in South Africa, who have become an integral part of its people, must head back to the Netherlands.

These are facts. However, when ministers and experts gather, they do not deal with them. Those irrefutable, disturbing facts are glossed over. We concentrate on the branches and leaves of a tree, while paying no attention to its roots. This is a doomed attempt.

Millions of blacks were transferred from Africa to Europe and America. Why are they being stopped now? These are double standards. When the blacks were needed to be used as beasts of burden, nobody said that they must be respected and left to live in their own continent.

On the contrary, it was claimed that their transfer was legitimate. They were shipped like cargo across the ocean. Those who were not physically fit were thrown overboard to feed the fish. North America and Europe were developed thanks to labor of the blacks.

That was a forced migration. When the movement of people from one place to the other was to the benefit of a certain party, migration was imposed on them. People were hunted like animals in the jungles of Africa. Now these very same people, the black Africans, are being told that their movement and migration from Africa is a cause for concern and that an end must be put to it.

Those poor souls ask: “When you were in need, you transferred our forefathers and said that migration was necessary. Why is it different now?” It is true that the things I just mentioned are present, in some way, in the back of the heads of many people including illiterate ones.

Those thoughts impel them to migrate. In their internal dialogue, they ask themselves: “If they transferred my forefathers, why are they erecting barriers in my path?” Migration was the engine of the development of the world. Certain races migrated to other places.

The indigenous people were assimilated. Emigrants came and developed Australia, the islands of the Pacific and the Atlantic. They settled in and developed all continents of the world. This is what that poor, illiterate African says to himself. Why are they stopping me now? The answer to this question is what makes him board the “Death Boats” that you have been talking about.

“The last age of slavery was the one when the Black race was enslaved by the White. The memory of that era will remain vivid in the minds of blacks until they feel that they were rehabilitated and their dignity restored. That tragic historical event, the painful awareness of it and the psychological search for the satisfaction resulting from the rehabilitation of a whole race are the reasons of the movement of the Black race to avenge itself and achieve dominance.

These reasons cannot be ignored”. This is a part of what the “Green Book” says about the Black Race. In order to save your time, I refer those who wish to read more to Chapter III of the Green Book.

The earth belongs to all human beings. Migration took place in the past. Slavery followed it. There was no objection to the transfer of people from their countries to be exploited as slaves. The era of colonialism was ushered in after that. All those elements intermingle in the hearts and minds of the African people who migrate today. Everybody is up in arms against that that migration.

Colonialism gave Africans, and other colonized peoples, the impression that the Earth belongs to all, and that no part of it is the exclusive property of a group of people and is forbidden to others. People in the heart of Africa saw Belgians come to settle in their land and own parts of it. They saw the whole of Congo become the personal property of Leopold.

They saw foreigners settle in Zimbabwe, Malawi and what they called Northern Rhodesia and Southern Rhodesia. Libya was considered Rome’s Fourth Coast. This gave Libyans the feeling that Italy and Libya were one state. If Libya is Rome’s Fourth Coast, why then is it forbidden for a Libyan to go to Italy? When it was necessary for Libya to be that “fourth coast”, war was waged to make it so. Now, what is said is “no, you are an illegal immigrant, you are not welcome here, you are Libyan and you are a foreigner”. Did you not say that Libya was your “fourth coast”?  Was it acceptable then because it was in your interest, but now that it serves mine, it becomes unacceptable?

Until recently, France maintained that Algeria was an integral part of French soil. France ruled Algeria for 130 years. France annexed Algeria in 1830 and declared an indivisible part of its territory. That fact convinced Algerians that they and France were parts of one whole.

When they go to France, they go to their own country. How can it be said to Algerians now that they are immigrants? How could that be? You said to us that Algeria was a part of France. When we tried to challenge that statement, you fought us. One and a half million Algerians paid with their lives to challenge that statement. At the same time, France and Europe continued to insist that Algeria was an integral part of France.

They convinced Algerians that they were French and Europeans. So, why can they not go France? 

Morocco is an independent state. It is a member of the Arab League, the UN and the Islamic Conference. Ceuta and Melilla are geographically in Morocco but they are a part of Spain. How can anybody convince a Moroccan that Spain and Morocco are not the same thing. He considers the two countries to be one. As I said the case of Ceuta and Melilla proves that. How can Moroccans be told that they are aliens and immigrants in Spain? They should be able to go to Madrid like they go Rabat.

During the colonial era, the people of Africa were made to believe that Europe and Africa are an integrated whole. The King of Belgium was the owner of the whole of Congo. This being the case, then the Congolese, as the property of the King of Belgium, could go freely to the land of their King and Owner. They could move to Belgium, live and work there as if they were in Congo. The same applied to Algerians in France. As their country was considered Rome’s Fourth Coast, Libyans had the right to go to Rome. Citizens of Zambia, Zimbabwe, Malawi and Rhodesia were told that their countries belonged to Britain. Therefore, they could go to Britain as if they were moving inside their own country.

At one point in time, the Suez Canal was British. How can an Egyptian citizen be prevented from going to Britain while the latter owned a part of Egypt? How can he not be allowed to go to work, or even to reside, in Britain? If the Suez Canal, an integral part of Egypt, was the property of Britain, how can an Egyptian are denied the right to live in Britain? Which is graver; the recognition of the ownership by a foreign power of a whole canal that falls within the territory of Egypt, or the presence of some Egyptians who seek work in Britain?

To this day, there are High Commissioners of the British Crown in various countries. India was the Jewel of the Crown. Then, Indian citizens can go to Britain in their millions, since they are subjects of the Crown. How can they be told that they are foreign immigrants?

The First and Second World Wars were ignited by Europe. Tens of millions of men were killed in them. Europe needed labor so, Asians and Africans were encouraged to move to Europe to make up for the shortage in manpower. This fact is very important because it gave Africans and Asians the feeling that, in time of need, they can go to Europe.

When Europe needed the, they were transferred. When they were needed as slaves, soldiers and cheap labor, they were transferred. When Europe needed colonies, it came to their countries.

It would be both ignorant and superficial on our part to ignore those historical and psychological accumulations. In addition, the colonial era resulted in the pillage of Africa’s riches. The gold mines were depleted and left as gaping holes in the ground. Diamonds, copper, iron ore, cobalt, manganese and phosphate were transferred to the old colonial powers.

After achieving their so-called independence, people of the former colonies wanted to build their countries. They discovered that their riches were plundered. They had a feeling that they need to go after those riches. A French writer whose name escapes right now once said: “Either wealth comes to people, or people will go to the place where wealth is found”.

This statement is true. Riches were transferred from Africa to Europe. Africans go after those riches of their land. They cannot restore those riches to their countries. So, they go to work as laborers in the factories built on the riches of their continent. They feel that the road networks, the irrigation systems and the railroad tracks that criss-cross Europe and America are the fruit of the labor of their forefathers. They feel entitled to a share of that prize.

Can the raw materials of Africa be returned to it? If that is the case, then well and good. This must be the first decision to be made. Africans went to Europe seeking a share in their plundered wealth. If it were returned to them, migration would stop. They go back to their continent to find that their gold, diamonds, cola and other materials have been returned to it. This would contribute to ending migration.

The agricultural products of Africa such as mango, pineapple, cocoa, coffee and papaya are made into shampoos and body lotions in Europe while Africans need them. Instead of Europeans washing their bodies with pineapple, let them return it to the children of Africa to eat. Or, let us all go to Europe and use it to wash our hair and bodies. Who has turned nutritious food into cosmetic products? It is the private sector.

It seeks nothing but profit even at the expense of the misery of millions. We hear a lot of talk about the need to encourage the private sector. However, it was that sector that stole the food of the hungry children and transformed it into cosmetic products for the sake of profit while the children starve to death. Eggs, cocoa, milk and all kinds of fruits were made into shampoos!

Let us move now to some existing measures that actually favor migration. The purpose of your meeting is to address, and reverse migration. However, there are some existing political and administrative measures that act against that purpose and favor migration.

Let us take the Barcelona process. North Africa, the Middle East, Europe and the Mediterranean are covered by that process. Therefore, as a citizen under the umbrella of Barcelona, I am entitled to move to Europe.

Has the Barcelona process not called for cooperation, the elimination of poverty, the freedom of movement and labor?

Has it not advocated mutual help and living in peace with one another? Does it not aim at the creation of a single parliament and the harmonization of legislation, and the achievement of similarities among its component parts? How can we be similar while you are rich and I am poor? I must become as rich as you are. Then, you as a European citizen must allow me, an African citizen, to share your wealth.

The Barcelona Process has encouraged this line of thinking. How can you initiate that process then decide to stand against its logical results?  This meeting is against the spirit of Barcelona.

That spirit calls for integration, for allowing us to move to Europe in our millions. End the Barcelona Process. When that happens, you can say that Europe and Africa are two distinct entities separated by a sea. Yes, when that process is annulled, I will be convinced that we are two separate entities not one. However, when you talk of the Euro-Mediterranean cooperation, you have included me in Europe. You make me in Libya a part of Europe.

Under Barcelona, I am entitled to go all the way to Scandinavia. If this is unacceptable, then the contradictory process must be terminated.

There is another notion; that of the New Neighborhood put forward by the EU. This is as interesting as the Barcelona Process. If we want Barcelona, then let us accept its results. But let it not be like slavery and colonialism; good if it works in your favor and evil if it works in mine.

Algeria , Morocco, Tunisia, Egypt and Jordan have become the “neighbors” of Europe under the new initiative. Neighbors have rights and duties towards each other. When they are in need, they go to their neighbors. Someone can say: “I am from the Neighborhood. I am going to my neighbors”. Who are those neighbors? They are the Europeans who have accepted me as their neighbor. Have you not said that Algeria, Morocco, Tunisia, Egypt and even Jordan in the Middle East are your neighbors? Then those people have the right to go to their neighbors in Europe.

One of the results of all those arrangements ( Barcelona, the New Neighborhood and the Euro-Mediterranean Cooperation) is that the Africans who are not a part of that circle, now come to those countries as a way to get to Europe through its “neighbors”. Someone comes from an African country not part of the Barcelona Process. He heads to a country that is part of that process. Then goes to Europe on the basis of it.

“Where are you coming from?” “From Algeria” he says. “Why are they coming to Europe?” His answer would be “because Algeria is a part of the Barcelona Process. Does that process not cover Europe and the Mediterranean? I am from the Mediterranean. Why are you preventing me from migration? I am here to live and benefit from Barcelona and the New Neighborhood”.

There is another thing called the “Mediterranean Partnership” or something like that. A partnership means that we share everything as partners. When you speak of partnership while you are rich and I am poor, it means that I must share your wealth. This is what partnership is about. Is this the meaning of the partnership proposed to North African countries?  If so, fine let us become partners and share everything.

These are attractive slogans. No one can object to them. However, the fact that they were designed to serve ulterior motives and based on double-standards would destroy international cooperation. Their contradictions are a grave threat to international politics. You talk of partnership, the say you cannot share. Go back where you came from. Have you not told me I was your partner? If you are serious about the resolutions you are going to adopt here, then all those things, the Partnership, Neighborhood and Barcelona, must be cancelled. The visas must be re-instated.

Among the things that facilitated migration is the Shengen visa. Now, people try to get to the closest European country. Once there, they heave a sigh of relief because the whole of Europe is open to them.

Under Shengen, no visas are required between European countries. You cancelled them and then you ask why migrants are increasing? You opened the door wide. Reinstate visas. In the past, someone would want to go Germany. He asks himself ‘how would I make it there?” Now, all he has to do is sail to France, and from there go to Germany.

Shengen allows him to do that. When he knows that Shengen is no longer, he will think twice. If there are borders and visa requirements, how will he be able to get from France to Germany? Those obstacles will discourage his leaving Ghana, Mozambique or Zimbabwe. Now, they think that getting to Europe is easy.

All one has to do is get to the closest European country, even if they have to swim to get there. Once there, the whole of Europe is open to them. To stop immigration, you must cancel the Shengen visa. Otherwise, you cannot ask why the migration flows are increasing. Libya too, must reinstate the visa requirement with Arab and non-Arab countries. Any Arab can enter Libya without a visa. Libya is an Arab country and a member of the Arab League. It is a rich, oil producing country with a small population and no poverty. It is logical that many Arabs would want to come to it.

However, in truth Libya is not their destination. From Libya, they head to Europe. Statistics show that 80% of the migrants from Libya are Arabs. The remaining 20% are from Africa. They exploit the lack of a visa requirement to enter Libya. Then, they find the gangs, the smugglers, the boats and the agents to go to Europe. Investigations are underway in Libya.

It was discovered that some officers here take bribes and are involved in smuggling operations. They have created mafias and gangs with citizens from Egypt, Tunisia, Algeria, Morocco and some African and European countries. Some European tourists marry men from Egypt and Libya. This is a way for their husbands to gain legal entry into Europe.

There many ways to circumvent the law. I am sure you are aware of them. Some people destroy their passports upon arrival and make taking care of them your problem and burden.

There are also the other calls for human rights, the right to asylum, the rights of migrants, combating discrimination and racism. They are wonderful humane slogans. They are even revolutionary. They also are among the elements that encourage migration.

If you want to limit migration, you have to deal with those elements. If anyone can be granted refugee status and receive a monthly salary the moment they arrive in Europe, then thousands will rush to Europe.

The right of asylum was corrupted by you. There are precise definitions of who is a refugee or a political refugee. Now, a criminal could write that he is the chairman of a democratic party. He can go to Switzerland or any other country and claim that he is persecuted in his country.

He is then accepted as a political refugee and receives financial support. When people see that a criminal is living happily in Switzerland and enjoying himself there, they think they must follow his example.

Every criminal, every thief and every “stray dog” is tempted to do the same. Fabricate some papers and claim to be in the opposition in your country. When those crooks hear the talk of human rights and freedom, they jump on the bandwagon and claim to be advocates of human rights and freedom to get asylum. This attitude has encouraged all and sundry to do the same.

Who is a political refugee? It is someone who is involved in politics; a minister, a president, a king, a member of parliament, the holder of a diplomatic passport or a member of a legitimate political party who faces persecution in his country for purely political reasons.

If such a person seeks asylum in another country, he can be accepted. Some commit murder and assassinations in their country. Once they are discovered, they flee to Europe and be treated like political refugees. This is a farce. Some people have no political position in their countries, escape from their countries and claim to be in the opposition and seek political asylum. They are not politicians. They are nothing but stray dogs. How can you receive them as political refugees? This attitude has encouraged a lot of people to do the same so as to be able to live in Europe ultimately.

Europe needs to reconsider and redefine political refugees. Can anybody who deceives you be a political refugee? Look at those who were given political asylum and then turned into terrorists. In Europe, you have a simple choice. You can be true to your slogans, which means you can longer discuss migration. You must accept all the migrants who come to your doors even if there were a hundred million of them.

Or you must reconsider your slogans and policies to close all the loopholes that encourage immigration. The security approach to deal with migration is doomed to failure. Libya’s land borders extend for six thousand kilometers. We cannot prevent the smuggling of the subsidized cheap foodstuffs to Chad, Niger, Sudan and other neighboring countries. Whatever we do, even if we bring NATO to help us, we will not be able to control those borders.

You could also accept reality. You could come to terms with the fact that migration is a natural phenomenon that has its historical, psychological and economic causes. You could accept that phenomenon like we accept Tsunami and other natural phenomena.

Then, there will be no need to exert ourselves in meetings such as this. You could do that or deal with the causes that encourage migration. The modern causes are well known. They must all be terminated. I mean the visa question, Barcelona, the Euro-Mediterranean, the Partnership, human rights, the manner of granting political asylum, the rights of migrants and the rights of refugees. All these things must be reconsidered in a manner that does not encourage migration. All the things you do and the things that exist now encourage it. Then you ask why migration is taking place? If a hungry animal sees food nearby, it will definitely go for it. How can it not? It is only natural for it to go where food is available.

People go to Europe because everything you put in place encourages them to do so. Barcelona, the Euro-Mediterranean, the plunder, the single visa, human rights, the rights of refugees, the rights of I do not know what, the civil society organization and all the other elements of the existing mess, all of those things encourage migration.

They all work against this conference. Even language plays a role in this. If Nigeria is an English-speaking country, how can a Nigerian not go to Britain? If he has been made a part of that language and culture, how and why is he prevented from going there?

  Ghana too is English-speaking. Why is a Ghanaian not allowed to go to Britain? He was colonized, oppressed, enslaved and a language was imposed on him. No one thought that one day he would use that fact to create a problem, to demand his right to go to your country because he speaks the same language.

 The same is true of French speakers. They would find it hard to understand why a conference like this one, a conference that opposes migration, is held in the first place. They would say that they are Francophone and that they have a right to go France. We speak the same language, we are part of the same culture and we are the same people. What is this conference for? Cancel it, for we are going directly to France.

 You know these facts but you prefer to deny them. It would be a catastrophe if you did not know them. There is another very dangerous dimension related o migration. Look at the map of the world. You will see the countries from which migrants leave and the countries to which they go. A major population explosion has started in Asia.

 It will reverberate all over the globe. Waves of immigrants will go wherever there is a population vacuum. Now, you are addressing migration from Africa to Europe. Soon, all of us in Africa and Europe will face the new challenge of vast waves of immigration from Asia. They will come like swarms of locusts as a result of the population explosion in China, the Indian Ocean and East Asia. A look at the map would make that threat abundantly clear. How do you propose to deal with this challenge?

You are gathered here to discuss migration from Africa to Europe. Now a human deluge of astronomical proportions is a bout to be upon us. Like the biblical Gog and Magog, they will come. I am sounding the alarm before the whole world. The population explosion in Asia is another grave challenge. It will engulf Africa and Europe. Please note it down and be my witnesses.

 Another look at the map would reveal additional causes for the increase in migration. The current military interventions in Iraq, the Gulf, the Middle East, the Kurdish region in Turkey and Iran, and the situation in the Horn of Africa, all feed migration. So do the numerous civil wars in the Southern Philippines, in the south of Thailand, in Chechnya, in the Great Lakes region in Central Africa, in Cote D’Ivoire, in the Horn of Africa, in Chad and the Sudan. All these civil wars increase migration. Who is behind them? The same hands that created colonialism and caused havoc in the world are behind those civil wars. The private sector, the weapons manufacturers and the arms merchants benefit from them.

 The European intelligence agencies pick a person, train him, provide him with funds and assign him the responsibility of starting a tribal war, a border dispute, an ethnic conflict or a religious war in some part of the world. When this war flares up it benefits the arms merchants and the weapons manufacturers.

 It also becomes a convenient pretext for an international intervention. Those who contribute Blue Helmets will also benefit. Even the UN will make a profit. It has become such business! When a war breaks out they send seventy thousand peacekeepers. These of course need money. The money is given to the UN. If the operation is estimated to cost ten billion dollars, the UN spends six billion and keeps four billion for itself. Even the UN has become a merchant of war and an agent that works on commission.

 In conclusion, I don’t want there to be any confusion or a misunderstanding of what I said. I did not wish to discourage you. Nor did I wish to object to the measures to combat migration. On the contrary, I am with you completely. I hope to see an end to migration. Libya is one of the countries that have been severely affected by migration.

 It has depleted our resources. We have twice or three times as many people as our own in Libya. We feed them, house them, provide them with transportation, and they take their share of all the cheap products subsidized by the Libyan budget. We sincerely hope that you will find a solution for this problem.

I was completely honest with you. I have uncovered the truth, and laid it bare before you, in order for you to find a solution. This is proof of my sincerity. If a patient needs surgery we cannot give him painkillers. That would be an act of deception, an act that can only be carried out by an ignorant person. Honesty dictates that a professional doctor talks honestly with the patient and tells him the truth about his case. And to inform him that he is in need of a major surgery and not just painkillers.

 What I tried to do was to put the whole truth before you. Earth belongs to all human beings. The inhabitants of all continents are all originally migrants. This has to be taken into account. The elements I raised concerning the eras of slavery, colonialism, and the plunder of natural resources need also to be taken into account. We cannot overlook the First and Second World Wars which took the lives of millions of men, and thus encouraged migration to Europe and other parts of the world. We need to remember the reasons and the causes of those wars.

 It was the colonial powers that imposed their language on the colonized peoples. It was they who gave them the impression that Africans and Europeans are of the same continent and are the same peoples. How could anybody talk of two distinct continents while at the same time talking of the Belgian Congo, Italian Libya, The French Sudan, the British Sudan, and French Algeria? That gave people the impression that they are entitled to go to the “Mother Country”.

In addition I must say that the matters I mentioned earlier such as the single visa, Barcelona, the Euro Mediterranean cooperation and partnership, and the calls of human rights and the rights of refugees have all facilitated migration. I put them all bluntly before you in order to assist you in your task. If you wish to solve the problem, you must solve it by addressing those facts.

I wish you all success. May peace and the blessings of God be upon you.

Inland Seas and Foreign Fleets

07 AUGUST 2010
 WORDS of Our Brother-Leader on World peace and Nuclear Disarmament

 There is a lot of talk about the maintenance of world peace, preventing wars and saving the peoples from their scourge. If there is any truth to such talk, if it is not mere hypocrisy or the well-known electioneering propaganda, certain practical steps need to be agreed upon and implemented by the whole world. Foremost among those is the complete elimination of weapons of mass destruction; not the partial or gradual elimination but the complete one. This matter may be addressed in more detail in a future essay. However, seas are the topic of this essay. If we are serious about the maintenance of world peace, we must have the courage to take the following, simple step. Namely, to ensure that no military fleets are present in the inland seas and gulfs except those that belong to the littoral states. *1 By that I mean the Mediterranean Sea, the Black Sea, the Baltic Sea, the Red Sea and the Arab-Persian Gulf.

If we are serious about building peace, if we take a genuine interest in peace, we must take this step. Peace us important for the world peoples. Peoples who are the cannon fodder and who die by the millions in wars yearn for peace. Tyrants, dictators and leaders like Hitler may not share that burning desire for peace.

The UN must adopt this proposal. Certain arrogant powers threaten the peace of the world, are inimical to the welfare of peoples and show no interest in their safety and security. All the entities that represent the conscience of the world and care for the safety of humanity are called upon to impose this proposal on those powers. They must take all the necessary measures to ban the presence of foreign fleets in inland seas until this becomes a general policy.

If this proposal is not formally adopted, peace-loving forces may find themselves compelled to close the straits of Gibraltar, Dardanelles, Bab El-Mandab Hormuz as well as the Baltic Sea to the foreign military fleets. Only the fleets of the littoral states and the civilian fleets should be allowed to navigate those waters.

*1: This is probable reference to the provocations that the USA made with “military exercises” off the Libyan Mediterranean coast between 1981-1986, which resulted in destruction and bombings of sovereign Libyan lands and properties and the sinking of Libyan vessels and shooting-down of Libyan jets in and over waters designated as belonging to Libya by The American Armed Forces.


Sunday, 14 August 2011

A Legitimate Target.

August 12/13, 2011Reporters taken to mass funeral in Libyan town, nearby hospital, CNN, August 10

Libyan government officials said the mass funeral witnessed by foreign journalists Tuesday in the village of Majer accounted for a fraction of the people killed by a series of deadly airstrikes late Monday night. “Eighty-five Libyan civilians, including 33 children, 20 men, 32 women and we’re still counting, were massacred last night in an intensive air raid by NATO on the town of Majer,” declared the spokesman for Moammar Gadhafi’s besieged government, Musa Ibrahim. It is impossible for CNN to confirm the extent of the casualties, and whether or not they were all civilian.

No. One at least – very graphic video – seems to be in military clothing. Another blown to small bits (worse yet) is a grown male, at any rate.

In an e-mail to CNN, NATO confirmed that aircraft bombed targets south of Zlitan Monday night. But a spokesman for the military alliance denied targeting civilians. “NATO had very clear intelligence demonstrating that former farm buildings were being used as a staging point for pro-Gadhafi forces to conduct attacks against the people of Libya,” wrote a public affairs officer with NATO’s Operation Unified Protector, on condition of anonymity. “We do not have evidence of civilian casualties at this stage, although military casualties, including mercenaries, are very likely owing to the nature of the target.”

Here’s the evidence. Mercenaries?A girl, injured physically but she’ll be fine. Emotionally … she lost someone, possibly several someones.

This one’s just dead. She was just a baby.

Definitely dead, not likely to be fake.

But hey, you can’t make a fucking omelette without breaking a few eggs, huh? The only way to protect civilians is to get rid of Gaddafi, and if that requires pressure that means sometimes killing 33 children, 20 men, 32 women, well … such is the high cost of the type of freedom we require them to have there. Did they mention some mercenaries might’ve been killed too? Again for emphasis, Mecenaries – that’s code for Gaddafi’s faltering, and we’re almost done here – just like everyone said back in February.

Spokane Protest: A Small Success

August 14, 2011 The other day, August 12, was a record day for viewers on my blog and Youtube page, scoring already more than 300 views for my new video, three new friends, new followers, etc. Then I diappeared at the same time, leaving comments not responded to and so on. I was preparing for the protest yesterday here in Spokane, in solidarity with the Harlem march by the ANSWER coalition, the Nation of Ilsam, and others.

This went ahead, if not in a way that spurred further news stories, according to two articles that finally appeared, one with video, the other with a photo, inset here. As you can see, they wave the monarchist/rebel/CIA flag in some number (handed out by organizers?), and the real, green, pan-African flag not at all that I saw. That’s unsettling. Our rally was last-minute, planned by my girlfriend when we saw the larger local group not planning anything. She put out the fruitless invites, I made the signs and prepared a flier I couldn’t print when my printer jammed. We didn’t expect much, but more than the five people who attended, including myself, my girlfriend, her niece and her niece’s boyfriend. I’m on the right with the green bandana. The fifth, a great help, was street musician Harpman Hatter, providing electric blues harmonica (just off to the right). We plan to do these regularly, but more general usually.

We also had a rebel flag. I had it so it was green until you flipped down the panel with the added colors and their associated ideas. This is a photo I cleaned up and enhanced a bit.

The contrast turned out sort of odd, seeing this same flag being waved by African-Americans on the streets of Harlem.

“Bombing His Own People.” Really?

Evidence and Over-Acitivist Imaginations August 1/2, 2011 last edits Aug 14There has been virtually no Libyan Air Force presence over Libya’s own territory since the March imposition of a no-fly zone and swift enforcement of it by NATO. Just how much aerial bombardment there was prior to that, and of what kind, is the matter of some deabte.The pre-no-fly period can be further broken into two main segments. The first is late February, the 16th to about the 25th, when the rebellion is generally understood (incorrectly) to have been strictly protest oriented and peaceful. The other span is after cities had fallen, starting Feb 19 really, but only a solid fact to respond to by the last days. By then, no one could reasonably deny the government’s opponents were armed bligerents to be called “rebels” or “freedom fighters,” not “protesters.”It’s the earlier reports of bombing simple protesters that had the shocking effect on world conscience driving intervention, especially in the skies NATO would seize to bomb Libya. These came in quick, in a rapid burst from Feb. 21-23, and then stopped.Supporting evidence beyond the flimsy early reports never surfaced. We saw no videos of jets over head, let alone of bombs falling from them. There are no photos of craters in the streets, or of homes or anything flattened by these attacks. Remains of the exploded bombs, or any unexploded ones, never surfaced. No victims among the hundreds claimed have ever been shown or named.The only evidence is as follows:Videos from Labraq Airport: Der Spiegel reported on Feb. 26 about “the first solid proofthat the dictator’s regime had bombed his own people.” This they cited an activist’s “shaky” videos of the Feb 18-20 battle for Labraq airport, near al Baida. Among other things, this footage was said to show “a Libyan fighter jet roaring over al-Baida and dropping a bomb not far from the airport,” itself not clearly against protesters, but there was also “a helicopter shooting into the mass of people.”The video was said, by Der Spiegel, to have been posted all over the Internet, but as I said there, I cannot find it now, nor any other allusion to it. It seems likely this claim of widespread dissemination – or the content of said videos – was just a miscommunication.Orders to Bomb Benghazi The most high-value moment that really made an impression on the world community, and shaped the coming “no-fly zone,” was when pilots defected to the rebel side and claimedthey were ordered to bomb innocent people. It happened twice in a three day span.As I’ve written about elsewhere, two Libyan pilots in their single-seater Mirage jets defected and landed on Malta February 21. They didn’t just land quietly either, but swooped around in an air-show manner to draw attention prior to landing, a witness tells me (see the link). They claimed they’d been ordered, at least as Reuters put it, citing Maltese officials, “ordered to bomb anti-government protesters in Libya’s second largest city of Benghazi.”Benghazi had just the day before fallen under rebel control, in a military sense. So even if the order was true, it’s not obvious why the government would be interested in killing those still only protesting, rather than the heavily armed and ruthless gangs declaring war on the government.But we don’t know for sure the order, or even a more legitimate version of it, was ever truly given. We have only the word of those two pilots. They remain unnamed, but were both reportedly high-ranking colonels, not unlike their fellow Air Force colonel Abdullah Gehani, arrested by the Libyan government a couple of weeks earlier on suspicion of helping set up some kind of overthrow with French involvement (see here).The defecting colonels also seemed to be – possibly – escorting two helicopters ferrying undocumented, mysterious Frenchmen who arrived on Malta just before them. One set of craft escaping from Benghazi without clearance, the others allegedly sent toBenghazi but veering off without clearance, both meeting up on Malta. Hmmm…Strange as it this alleged order was, two days later came confirmation of the charge. Two more Libyan air force pilots ejected from and ditched their two-seater SU-22 jet near Ajdabiya. They landed and surrendered to the rebels, claiming they too were ordered to bomb Benghazi but just couldn’t follow through. News 24, Libya pilot rejects orders, crashes plane:

Tripoli – A fighter pilot disobeyed orders on Wednesday to bomb the opposition stronghold of Benghazi and ditched his plane after he and his co-pilot ejected, a Libyan newspaper reported on its website. The Russian-made Sukhoi 22 crashed near Ajdabiya, 160km west of the city which has fallen to anti-regime protesters, a military source said, quoted in Quryna newspaper. “Pilot Abdessalam Attiyah al-Abdali and co-pilot Ali Omar al-Kadhafi ejected with parachutes after refusing orders to bomb the city of Benghazi.”

So, to summarize: three jets were allegedly sent to the rebel capitol to kill protesters only. Four pilots, two missions, all aborted by the pilots, none carried out. This alleged universal rejection reflected poorly on the regime, whose orders no one seemed to follow anymore. And their 0% success rate might explain why they stopped allegedly trying to bomb Benghazi just three days after it fell. Ammunitions Depots, not Protesters Successful air-strikes in rebel-held areas were nonetheless implied in a February 22 interview with Saif al-Islam al-Gaddafi. The leader’s son told Christiane Amanpour that the military had not attacked Libya civilians. “Show me a single attack, show me a single bomb. The Libyan air force destroyed just the ammunition sites. That’s it.” he said.” [source] Again, no one has shown him or anyone the evidence that any bombs were dropped on protesters as opposed to raid-worthy ammo dumps and possibly other fully military targets the “protesters” had already stolen. Aerial Bombing of Tripoli Neighborhoods While the government failed to bomb actual enemy fighters or civilians in the east, there were contemporaneous claims of successful attacks on their own capitol city to snuff out the relatively small violent protests that had started there. At first, I thought it came down to a single bold claim by one Adel Mohamed Saleh, a “political activist”, to al Jazeera. It was translated and reported by Reuters, filed 1:43 PM EST (6:43 GMT).

What we are witnessing today is unimaginable. Warplanes and helicopters are indiscriminately bombing one area after another. There are many, many dead. Our people are dying. It is the policy of scorched earth. Every 20 minutes they are bombing. It is continuing, it is continuing. Anyone who moves, even if they are in their car they will hit you.

“There was no independent verification of the report,” Reuters noted, and in fact the evidence suggests he didn’t witness any of that at all. Another message of the day, via Twitter (See here and/or here), said:

sultanalgassemi: Al Jazeera breaking Multiple reports confirm that military airplanes are bombing protesters in Tripoli. The rulers in Libya have cut off most international communications, but Al Jazeera is broadcasting ways that their jammed TV feed can be picked up, other agencies are offering land lines so that Tweets can be passed on to the world.

Multiple reports? Indeed. Another Tripoli witness came out in support of the activist Saleh who spoke to al Jazeera. This time it came in via al Jazeera, from “Soula al-Balaazi, who said he was an opposition activist.” As Reuters again translated, filed actually before the other report (5:11 PM GMT, one hour, 32 minutesbefore).

Military aircraft attacked crowds of anti-government protesters in the Libyan capital Tripoli on Monday, Al Jazeera television said. A Libyan man, Soula al-Balaazi, who said he was an opposition activist, told the network by telephone that Libyan air force warplanes had bombed “some locations in Tripoli”. He said he was talking from a suburb of Tripoli.

Again, “no independent verification of the report was immediately available,” said Reuters. But a while later there would be, and the second time, that same statement wasn’t true. Or were they suggesting these two were not independent reports? One way or another, they probably weren’t. A Version by Sea Possibly related is a similar accusation of insane naval bombardment of Tripoli on the 21st. This time, it was an activist, named Salem Gnan, “a London-based spokesman for the National Front for the Salvation of Libya,” speaking to the UK Guardian (I presume) and reported at 5:07 PM GMT – four minutes before al-Balaazi and 96 minutes before Mr. Saleh. Gnan said eyewitnesses in Tripoli told him the navy ships were firing into one part of the capital, on the outskirts. “Many people have been killed,” he said, and added that “[Gaddafi’s] plan is to use absolutely everything he can to stop what is happening.” But there’s no mention from these witnesses of jets – which Gaddafi had – dropping anything. Both versions of the attack of Feb 21 share multiple deadly explosions across town, but differ on what was happening in the sky. And they all three came in over a span of about an hour and a half. Quite strange. My guess is this: something blew up loudly at about 5:05 PM, heard by many people who would be left wondering what it was. This triggered the first two dramatic guesses what it was. Then Mr. Saleh thought for a bit before he decided to “corroborate” and expand the airplanes version with his over-activist imagination. Thus “multiple reports” can sometimes be born. What it Meant If not the evidence, the implications were certainly clear. As Reutersreported (the second one cited here), citing a total genius:

An analyst for London-based consultancy Control Risks said the use of military aircraft on his own people indicated the end was approaching for Muammar Gaddafi. “These really seem to be last, desperate acts. If you’re bombing your own capital, it’s really hard to see how you can survive, ” said Julien Barnes-Dacey, Control Risks’ Middle East analyst.

Just like ordering protesters shot, running to Venezuela, hiring mercenaries, resorting to mass rape, sniping children dead, and so on. All of these and more fantasies yet strongly hint to to us that Gaddafi is over. It’s been said worldwide, daily, for over five months now. Each time, the big “if” was the big problem. Video Evidence from Tripoli There are videos from Tripoli claiming to show the aftermath of these air attacks. By one of these I’ve seen, but didn’t save and cannot re-locate, we might have been seeing the effects, over a whole neighborhood, of some type of bomb that sprays graffiti, burns out a few buildings, and drags junk across the street. Does such a weapon exist, and is Gaddafi known to have acquired them? Another with very similar effects is still around. This is given as the rebellious Tajoura district: bombing in tajoora tripoli 22.02.2011.mp4. There is smoke rising in the distance, perhaps from an air-strike. But this bomb does nothing, on closer inspection, than burn a car and perhaps the insides of a building, sending up a plume of smoke. There’s also gunfire from men perhaps guarding a hilltop building in the distance. But a horde of civilians is unafraid of the warning shots into the air, charges the security line, and breaks through as the guards retreat. Others clamber over a wall and join their march towards that green-domed building. Another interesting video on Youtube is a re-broadcast on Jazeera English, it seems, of the original Saleh phone call (dubbed in English). Here it’s specified he’s calling from and speaking of the Fashlum neighborhood “where the revolution erupted in the city of Tripoli.” He claims that anyone who comes out to help the wounded and dead are shot by pervasive snipers, and that bombing runs were ongoing and aiming for people. Yet the B-roll footage under the audio shows many hundreds of people calmly walking away from somewhere, towards somewhere. A few run in and out of that column, for unclear reasons, but no one is falling dead. There’s no mass panic as if suddenly attacked, and there are no jets or anything shown. Mr. Saleh’s rant is worth a listen. He’s clearly fired up and shrieking over these things he says happened. And he knew just what was needed to stop them: outside intervention.From the video:

The Libyan people need urgent help! People are crying, death is everywhere! Why is the world silent on these atrocities? Why? This is the question. Why are the Arab countries keeping silent? Why? Within the next few hours, the entire Libyan population can be wiped out if this continues …

On March 4 Sky News had a look at Fashlum and Tajoura and brought back video:

“This is Fashlun, this is the centre of Fashlun,” Saif al Islam Gaddafi said. “Show me a single attack, one drop, one attack on Tajoura.” I was invited to tour around the suburbs of Tripoli with Col Gaddafi’s son. He insisted there have been no bombings in the capital designed to intimidate anti-government protesters – and prevent them from launching an uprising in the capital. During our drive we saw no evidence of airstrikes, but this was just a short, unscientific exploration of the city.

Sukhat Chandan was part of a UK delegation that spent longer and was more thorough. Here in late April he speaks with Russia Today about one of the first fact-finding missions. Mr. Chandan started with what he considered the most important claim, vis-a-vis unleashing the bombing of Libya. This was the alleged bombing of “three particular districts in Tripoli: Souk-al-Jouma, Fashlum, Tajoura,” all well-stocked with men like the ones we just heard from. “We visited these areas and there was no indication whatsoever of any aerial bombardment,” he said, along with many other fascinating findings. Looking for these scant videos of or about Tripoli bombings in February, I saw a very large number of non-hits roll by. Bombings of Tripoli, flames, flattened buildings, craters, unexploded ordnance, mangled or charred bodies, including baby-sized ones, damaged civilian infrastructure,  etc. But these were all after mid-March, and exclusively carried out by NATO, for months now aggressivelybombing civilians to protect them from bombing that was itself only rumored to begin with. Update Aug 14: The Russian Evidence Goodness, did I completely neglect for weeks now to even mention the Russian evidence against Gaddafi “bombing his own people?” Most, like this scholarly article by Ronda Hauben, cite an alleged Russian satellite-based information proving there were no airstrikes carried out in Libya in these early days I don’t really like this evidence, especially in its wide re-use as a lazy crutch. The allegation comes from a Russia Today broadcast, re-posted on Youtube here, for example. There are no supporting explanations or even specifics I’m aware of. It was satellite-based, perhaps photo-based. But if so, to prove a negative like “no airstrikes,” you’d need something like constant security camera footage over numerous Libyan military bases, showing no craft leaving, or over all cities, to prove no bombs dropped. Perhaps it was based only on photos looking for damaged buildings or craters in the streets. Or maybe it was something different, like monitoring military communications that would have heard such an order. Again, no specifics were given. Besides, Saif al-Islam admitted there were air strikes, just at ammunition depots, not on protesters in the street. When this notion was put before the skeptics at the JREF forum, it didn’t do so well. A reasonable-sounding consensus emerged among people of middling knowledge that this wasn’t possible. That’s not scientific disproof, and the forum has a mixed record, but I can’t see why I should embrace this as a leading point of evidence. If the claim is ever explained better and shown to be proof, or even as inconclusive supporting evidence, so be it. Until then I’ll call it an alleged support for an idea that’s still apparently true and is better illustrated in other ways.

Whose Cluster Bombs Fell on Misrata?

8/9 June  2011 last update (pulled) August 14I’ve pulled down this article, finally. It seems Human Rights Investigations was wrong on pretty much all fronts, and has been correcting the record, with help even from C.J. Chivers, etc. I won’t bother trying to sort out just what turned out different vs. what I had passed on before. Updates can be, or should be able to be, found at the HRI site. If anyone would like a copy of the old article summarizing the flawed arguments, drop me a line.In short, if the case for a NATO false flag operation in Misrata has fallen apart, it would seem Libyan forces did non-lethally deploy semi-banned cluster munitions they’re now known to hold, despite the government denials (see Moussa Ibrahim). This isn’t the gravest or most illogical move for them to make, but it is troubling if it’s a government order.However, perhaps mr. Ibrahim and the government didn’t know of such an order because it didn’t exist. Is it possible a rogue field commander got hold of some MAT-120 shells and used them on his own authority? Or that he made sure to shoot them harmlessly towards the journalist area, only to be seen and cause problems for the regime he was betraying? Yeah, either is possible. In fact, I’m going with either one of these, or an actual order from on high as the two best guesses. It’s one alleged Gaddafi regime crime I cannot rule out.

Friday, 12 August  2011

Video Study: The Qala’a Massacre

August 9, 2011 last update Aug 13First, the Confusion I recieved this comment yesterday from Peet73 at my post Rebel Atrocity Videos:

There was a hint from the facebook-group “British Civilians for Peace in Libya” on Saturday concerning a new atrocity video from the Nafusa Mountains. But it was immediatly deleted on Youtube before I had oportunity to watch it. Libya S.O.S. has a copy now:

We can only presume (perhaps?) this is the same video being talked about and shown here. Either way, the video at that link is the main subject here, covered below. But first, the commentary added at the posting mentioned a “propaganda machine” that “delete[d] this video” because “they describe this like murder by Libyan Army BUT you can see on 0:23 there is not Libyan army!” I’m not sure what this means. The whole video, that spot included, shows civilian victims only, going by clothes, and nothing shows whether it was the army or anyone else who killed them. Although ovbiously rebel forces are the natural suspect by a long shot. It might be that the confusion is about the victims, not the killers – was this massacre of soldiers or civilians by the “machine’s” narrative? Clearly this video shows the latter, but there have been many reports in recent weeks mentioning a “mass grave” of “Gaddafi loyalists” who were also, apparently, soldiers. But this isn’t news, really. I happened to catch a Russia Today broadcast that I thought might be a hit. The re-post I saw was from July 26, but in fact, it’s from July 22, and the anchor spoke with Sukat Chandan of British Civilians for Peace, who’d been, for the last couple of days, re-breaking a story from a week or so earlier. The anchor’s understanding was of:

Mass grave of alleged pro-Gaddafi soldiers has been discovered in a rebel-controlled area of the country, according to British newspaper the Telegraph. The location was swiftly bulldozed after the discovery, suggesting an attempt to cover up the killings. The bodies were reportedly mutiliated, adding to recent concerns of human rights abuses by Libyan rebels.

This sounds a bit like the Qawalish massacre first revealed by its discover, C.J. Chivers, on about July 12 (undated). The grave, while improper, wasn’t very massive – five dead soldiers dumped in a deep water basin, one buried under an olive tree next to it. I wrote about this on June 21, having caught it a couple of days late. Chandan spoke to Russia Today the next day so, for all I know, I was his source. But alas, I was already looking for a Telegraph story from that time, and I only now am aware of it. It ran on July 20 and is worth a read:

The headless corpse, the mass grave and worrying questions about Libya’s rebel army

The five corpses floated disfigured and bloating in the murky bottom of the water tank. Wearing green soldiers’ uniforms, the men lay belly down, decomposing in the putrid water.

Actually it sounds like exactly the same massacre. The body Chivers said “appeared to have been beheaded” was “cleanly decapitated.” The other with “his pants bunched down around his ankles” is confirmed with “the trousers of another had been ripped down to his ankles, a way of humiliating a dead enemy.” There is a photograph attached to the article of some men standing around looking, with only one of the victim’s hands visible in the foreground. There are some other additions I’ll have to update my post with. I had no idea they beat me to it by a day! And like Chivers but unlike me, they were there and seeing it first-hand. But it’s not the same as what we’re looking at here. I hope someone thought there was confusion, or else that was all a waste and a distraction. However, Peet cites Saturday, August 6 I presume, for this video mention by Chandan’s crew, and feels what Libya SOS has – posted Sunday the 7th and noting a deletion – is or might be the same. So again there might be a connection worth finding there, but I didn’t find it. Their Facebook page didn’t let me see wall posts older than yesterday, and I don’t know where else it would be. If anyone reading can help me find more info on this new video, I’d be happy to hear it. The New VideoAll I have so far is what it shows and what Libya SOS added, aside from an unrelated but interesting Fox News article:

SUNDAY, AUGUST 7, 2011 Battle for Libya: Rebels #Feb17 – the demonic animals kill 34 people WHO CAN STOP THE TRUTH! Rebels crime in the Western Mountain at Al Qala’a area! They killed all the civilians from Almeshashia tribe who refused to join them! Propaganda machine delete this video – becoouse they describe this like murder by Libyan Army BUT you can see on 0:23 there is not Libyan army! They will not stop TRUTH – never!

It’s hosted through Youtube in the unusual Libya SOS way, where I cannot find it on Youtube, cannot save a copy, and cannot embed it here, since the video ID code isn’t displayed. It was there both before and after my work shift, but since its alleged previous postings have vanished, I saved a lot of stills. Here is the title screen, in Arabic, using “Indian numbers” to indicate 34 victims.

I can’t vouch for that number. Some spots aren’t too clear, but I was fairly thorough, and counted exactly 30. It’s not less than that, possibly a bit higher. The still at left gives an idea of the layout. It looks like someone made a slight effort to dig a trench. Very slight. There’s certainly nothing proper about these burials. For what it’s worth, I think this is filmed early morning, not late afternoon. By their long shadows and the few observers viewed, this is filmed by armed rebels. I suspect these victims were not killed here. The lack of visible blood anywhere, and the uneven dispositions of those killed – some bound, some not, for example – and the haphazard arrangement suggests they were killed in various places around Qala’a or Yefren, and then dumped here.

The victims are varied, including young and old, fit and fat, apparently  all male, but I’m no expert on Libyan attire enough to venture the few I’m not so sure about. Three victims of special interest are clustered at the near end in the above view. In fact, the odd one with his pants half-down I focused on at right. If pants down is an insult, what’s this? A half-insult, one half-revoked by someone later on, or an accident in dumping? We may never know. He seems to be bound, hands behind his back. As for his face, it’s just a dark blur. Is this some burning-related torture, a dark rag, some added blur for decency, or what? I’m not sure. Several of the faces seem strangely blurry, in fact.

It’s a bit the same but less so with the apparent old man at left. We can see his hair and short beard are white, his head mostly bald. His hands seem to be bound behind his back, but how exactly he was killed isn’t clear. His face seems strangely yellow, even for being covered in the yellow soil. It’s probably nothing but the dirt, however. Another victim looks a bit small to me – quite likely a boy aged about fourteen. He’s one of the few with an injury that’s obvious at this resolution: a solid hole in the top of his skull, as clearly visible at right. Brain matter seems to be visible inside. A couple of the others look a bit small, perhaps not full-grown. But there don’t seem to be any small children present. Farther down are some fighting age men in more sporty clothing. They could be Arab or black, but more likely to civilian loyalist fighters of some sort. Others are in traditional gowns and such. At the end is at least one fairly obese person, and someone halfway covered with what looks like a heavy blanket or thin mattress. All but a few are laid face-down. Location, Location, Location…With no detailed sources available, we can’t be certain this even happened when and where it’s said to have. But short of certainty, I can say the topography is a nice fit. The Qala’a area has gentle but tight ridges lined with trees, sandy soil in narrow valleys between. This may be at the narrow end of any of these couple dozen small gullies. It might be possible to identify an exact spot, but I won’t bet my precious time on finding out.

As I said above, I suspect the rebels filmed this themselves, and posted it online. Why? Did they think their own discovery on video would make it possible to claim loyalist forces were responsible? Was it just one rebel faction running across the work of an allied network? What was their motive for filming it? Political or ethical? We may never know. Do they perhaps film these things to cause terror among those whose neighborhoods they’ll be in next? Perhaps. Are we the water carriers for this operation? Do they even watch Youtube closely in Qala’a and Yefren? If they do, will they run away or just get more pissed off and arm themselves to drive out the vermin? Can even NATO get away with bombing Libyan civilians defending themselves from eggregious human rights abuses like this seems to be? I look forward to seeing where this story goes. Where its Gone August 10: Peet73 alerts me in a comment below that there is a new postings, and a Googlesearch gave me another. The resolution of both seems a bit better, they’re able to be saved my way, and they’re posted by rebel-affiliated accounts. which I can save.

And, as both Peet73 and a Google search revealed, another rebel group/site, Shabbab Libya (Libyan youth) is calling for an investigation! It’s the different twist they add that makes that make sense.

Libyan Organizations demand the investigation of Nafusa town massacre Al-Qala’a, Nafusa Mountains, Libya, 9th of August 2011 – Following the discovery of video footage stored in mobile phones of captured Gaddafi regime troops, local Nafusa Mountain associations, ShababLibya, The Libyan Youth Movement and The Libyan Link, call on the Libyan National Transitional Council to shed light on the massacre of over thirty men and children in the area of Al-Qala’a, Nafusa Mountains. The footage found on captured Gaddafi loyalist mobile phones shows the corpses of more than thirty people, local men and boys, lying face down, hands tied and visibly executed. According to some sources, the men and boys were arrested by Gaddafi Regime troops on June the 2nd 2011. The bodies may be located in the Al-Mal’ab Forest area, however, this location is heavily mined and it is impossible to search. It is imperative to allow for the families of the victims to retrieve their loved ones so that they may be given a burial according to Islamic practices. The broad network of Libyan associations including the Al-Qala’a Civil committee and the families of the victims, supported by Libyan organisations abroad demand that the Libyan National Transitional Council (NTC) activate all possible channels to initiate investigations of war crimes and Human right’s abuses. In parallel, the network of Libyan associations requests assistance for the demining of this area, to allow for the recovery of the bodies.

So now it was allegedly filmed by Gaddafi forces and therefore, by implication, carried out by them. They have some specifics that are hard to double-check – an abduction date and some names, making them seem to know what they’re talking about. And perhaps it’s so. I’m glad they get the same impression the ones filming are sympathetic to the crime. I thought they seemed like rebels, but I still haven’t had the time to study closely, and I myself can only read so much from this kind of evidence. Nonetheless, I’m working on it, and have some analysis half-done. I will wait to post it until after I finish my new video, hopefully tonight. In the meantime, what I could use is anyone able to provide a transcript of what the observers are saying. Arabic-speakers? The best is an Arabic transcription of actual words spoken, then translated and available for reference. One valuable clue as to who’s filming can be heard at 2:15, about seven seconds after the cameraman seems to spit in disgust: the man behind him in a camo jacket mentions “Muammar Gaddafi,” I think. In what context? Aug 11:Video Timing: “Al-Gala massacre, 34 men executed including one child.” Posted by user misratapost, August 5.

MUAMMAR Gaddafi’s forces have committed “crimes against humanity and war crimes on a large scale” Torture, mass executions , using humans as shields and banned cluster bombs, rape… Here is another evidence from the town of Al-Gala — Libya

Then, “Footage of Gaddafi forces murdering farmers in Al-Qala, Nafusa Mountains.” Posted by Libyanym, August 6. Adds details.

Farmers who stayed behind to tend to their animals after their families fled to Tunisia were arrested by Gaddafi forces on June 2, 2011. This video is the footage of their corpses after their arrest, torture, and murder. Families of these farmers are still being informed of their death. Investigations into the details of this horrific incident are still underway. It has been confirmed that one of the farmers was 85 years old. The brutality of the Gaddafi regime knows no bounds, these are viscous crimes against humanity. Gaddafi terrorizes innocent civilians and continues to do so. The Libyan people call for their basic human rights and that Gaddafi be brought to justice.

Then Libya S.O.S. re-post, August 7, referring to previous deletions. Which posting was pulled? That’s not clear. IF there was a version up first that Libya S.O.S. and the British Civilians saw in the context of a rebel crime, that would be quite relevant. Conversely, if the rebels put it up first, it would go a ways towards illustrating their case – that this video was just now discovered by their forces. As it stands, it seems like the rebel version went up first. Does that mean real Gaddafi soldiers filmed this? Not necessarily. If so, does that mean they did it? Not necessarily. If they did, does that suggest a government order? No. Would it be right to demand the overthrowof the Johnson regime following the My Lai massacre? Probably not. We have as possibilities: 1) crimes against humanity by Gaddafi, alleged for the millionth time 2) the actions of a rogue unit, a side-effect of loss of command and control, what happens when the central authority is removed as NATO’s tried to do. 3) a rebel atrocity, like the others we know of Asking for an investigation: This is something I don’t recall seeing rebels do before. The truth is always clear, and the solution is always more weapons and help getting rid of Gaddafi. Would a TNC probe would mean a damn thing as far as discovering the truth? Or just provide confirmaton with some “authority?” The request does however seem to show their openness to an “investigation” as opposed to their earlier bulldozer work. They fear the truth, I suspect, hence the showof not seeming to fear it. The MO: Feels like Islamist-tinged, cocky, rebel work to me. Even the cartoon ruler all rebels know doesn’t fit the bill.


These are all males 12 and up, when everyone knows Gaddafi is either indiscriminate, or goes for women and small children first. The Location: I think I was wrong to be so sure that area is a match with Qala’a. User “Antinazi Hippy” questions the location in comments at Misratapost’s posting. He cites a topography mismatch, and suggests it was actually filmed in Zlitan, making all three postings – all claiming specific knowledge of the circumstances – wrong. That’s a hefty thing to propose, but as I said, I’m not seeing it like I did at first. Basically that was “there’s trees and a gully.” But it’s pretty flat, there’s no gully really, just the ditch. And the trees just go on in all directions, like they do in very few spots around Qala’a. Or so it seems now. Will come back with images and semi-final thoughts. Also, the cameraman’s shadow stretching across the trench makes clear the trench itself runs roughly north-south, whatever clue that is. By this, the trees – bushy evergreens – are present in large numbers in all four cardinal directions. Hundreds. The dots around al Qala’a are single trees that can be counted in the dozens at most in any one patch. Right? Will look closer … The party filming is no more than four, I’m pretty sure. The cameraman has a rifle, and a gaurd standing back is armed. The other two, not clearly armed. I’ll be back with stills and thoughts. The best clues will be in the audio track – what the two men who speak say, when, and how. Until find a friendly Arabic translator, I have nothing but the words at the bottom of the screen of misratapost’s posting. I’ll be back with those and anything else I find in the meantime. Aug 12:  The layout/scenery, best views I could find, rotated to upright. Directions given are if this is sunrise. If not, it’s sunset and all directions are reversed.

So it’s not really flat – there’s a decent slope to the west/northwest, or else the trees there are all slanted. It’s not as obvious in the west view, but the trees further back are progressively higher. (We don’t ever get a view of due east, or into the sun, that I caught.) Too many trees. I don’t think it’s Qalaa, immediate area. Looking closer at the Google maps imagery, the slopes there are steeper, and terraced in a funky way I don’t see here. An image search shows photos of imposing slopes, desert soil, rocks, dust, few trees. The soil between them blows and drifts like dunes. Here we have a veritable forest, leaves from something like olive trees, wispy dry grass (visible in the better views I’m seeing), a cover of greenish grass in spots.  There could be lichens or moss in there somewhere, in an extra-shady spot. Other things I’ll need to figure out – what was going on in early June and in the time since. I need a feel for the temporal topography as well. More video links, and a possible original:

“MASSACRE IN QALAA LIBYA.” Posted by ibnomar2005, Aug 5. This one may have the best resolution yet.
An original link from Facebook, a large format video posted in HQ on August 5 at 6:50 am. Definitely a tie or a winner for best clarity, apparent original. I’m using this for future screen grabs, and will see about saving a copy.

Aug 13: A clearer view of the victim with his pants down. It’s not clear if his arm is really tweaked back, missing, or what. The dark patch beneath him is I think a shadow of a rock ledge there. He’s clearly blindfolded here, it just slipped out of place. The “Gaddafi soldiers” on video:

Soldier #1 walks up, seen in shadow, armed and filming. The smaller inset shows the shape of his camera – not an iphone. #2 and #3 walk up behind, in that order I think, pass to his left and cross the trench. #4 stays behind standing guard. #2 manages to avoid being filmed really, crossing back to #1’s side as he turns the camera their way (see inset). He’s wearing dark jeans, a light civilian shirt, and sandals.

# 3 wears sandals as well, but a military jacket. His face is covered (to avoid smelling, or to avoid being seen?) but he seems fairly young, and seems to be filming on a smaller device. I’m not an expert on the different camo styles, weapons, etc. typically used by different parties. Do Gaddafi soldiers wear sandals? I suppose they could.

#4, standing off to the north,  wears a striped shirt. He’s got a chubby face, looks black (or is that just the shade?), with something on the side of his head that looks like gray hair, giving him a George Clinton look. He doesn’t seem any more professional in stance or attire than the others. He also seems to be recording the scene, making me guess that #2 is doing the same. Subtitles via Misratapost – no guarantee it’s what’s actually said. Subtitles in quotes, speaking party in [square brackets].

1:25 – “34 bodies.” [#3, faint, saying more than this] 1:34 – “This is the fate of rats.” [#3, clearly saying more than this] 1:48 – [#3 question, no subtitle] 1:52 – “This is the fate of the dirty rats – dogs.” [#1, cameraman] 1:56 – “They smell very ill.” [#3] 2:04 – “See the dogs, see the dogs.” [#1, spits] 2:09 – “This is the fate of rats.” [#1] 2:11 – “This is a child. Show the child.” [#3, where he says something just like “Muammar Gaddafi,” with a slight “eh” at the end. is there a way of saying “show the child” that sounds like that?] 2:20 – “This is the fate of the dirty rats. These are old men.” [#3. voice muffled by jacket] 2:46 – “See the rats.” [#3] 3:07 – “This is a child. Dig a grave for him.” [#1] 3:13 – “This is from Pakistan? No. I thought so. Dig a hole for him.” [#2, apparently, and #1 speaking]

The last line sounds like what’s spoken, the Pakistan part anyway. It’s an odd side-track, but I presume they’re referring to the boy with the hole in his head, wearing the outfit I think is called a shalwar kameez, like several others are. It’s popular in Pakistan, and wherever conservative Muslims live. The guy in jeans just didn’t get it. Is he even Libyan? The “fate of rats” part is repeated – the sound is about the same each time the cameraman says it: a bit like “muslaida jirdat.” This isn’t really impressive I suppose, but Google translate lets your hear various translated words. What it gives me for rats isn’t in there. Nor the words for rodents, dogs, fate, destiny, end, death – none of them is a match. What am I doing wrong, I wonder? Getting too literal? Aug 14: I’ve been over and over the area in Google maps, and still can’t find a good match. It’s hard to be sure, but the area in question is only a nook of hospitability a few miles wide, surrounded by tangled tectonic masses that just look bizarre – plus barren and treeless – from above. For anyone who wants to help, here again is the satellite imagery you can zoom way in on. If the spot can be found there, I want to know. Since I’ve heard Zlitan mentioned as an alternate, I tried to look there, but Google maps imagery is clouded over in that spot. It could provide some matches if visible, but I was also pulled to the area just north of Dafiniya, a few miles east of there as an area that makes sense. Either would put the heat on Misrata rebels instead of Zintan/Nafusah ones. We also have the supposed men making at least three recordings of the scene. They’re said to speak like Gaddafi soldiers, calling the dead “dogs” and “rats.” If that’s a well-known thing they’re supposed to do, wouldn’t that make it a well-known thing to do if you were trying to act like gov’t soldiers? I’m pretty sure I’ve caught rebels impersonating wicked soldiers in a few fake videos before. They act stupidly brutal, possibly drunk, demanding allegiance to Gaddafi, extracted with fake-slap and fake-kick force, and insulting the overly-cowed and helpless-looking people at every chance.  Apparently Arabs don’t do subtlety very well. This … if fake it’s more subtle. Maybe even the Pakistan line was designed to show how ignorant of Islam the regime’s western-dressed soldiers and mercenaries really are.  But that’s a ways ahead of where we’re at. And some points from Peet73:

Some remarks by the moment: There maybe a dirt track passing by in north and east (the guy with the AK47 at 0:23 stands perhaps in the middle of that track) Moreover the garbage gives a hint on a nearby road or frequently used track, that’s quite typical for north african roadsides. I think a plane is passing by (starting at 0:40). But this last point will not be very helpfull according to the number of NATO sorties.

African Mercenaries: In Mythology and Reality

July 6-8, 2011 last edits Aug 12Note, July 11: There are renewed and more credible reports of people who could almost be described as foreign African mercenaries fighting for Gaddafi. These are covered separately, for reasons explained there. This post is dedicated to the disastrous and unfounded accusations of February that helped make excuses for the excesses of the uprising.Accusations: One of the most widespread claims of the Libyan civil war is the Gaddafi regime’s use of sub-Saharan African mercenaries to crush the protests and turn back the first military gains. The “people of Libya,” we heard, were up against well-paid, black-skinned, black-hearted killers from the sandy or steamy depths of the continent Libya sits at the northern edge of. It’s so prevalent a claim as to be bland and no longer shocking – hundreds of articles, reports, and videos cite Gaddafi’s “African mercenaries” as self-evidently behind a range of atrocities.There’s no real controversy over the Libyans regime’s occasional use of foreign mercenaries, from farther south in Africa, to supplement the small military Libya can cull from its six million people. But the over-the-top and reflexive allegations here seem to flourish with ignorance, not scrutiny. It seems to be a racist mass hysteria – or something more calculated – at work.My article Anti-Black racism among Libyan rebelsexplains some of the background tensions and how they’ve played out this year. It’s ultimately nothing new, with Gaddafi’s pan-African vision, aid across the continent, exchanges and moves toward unification going back years, along with racial tensions and violence erupting, occasionally in massive race riots. But this time, it’s really been whipped up with specific allegations, claiming special knowledge that, in retrospect, seems to not have existed.

One rather troubling series of tweets from supposed rebel insiders I re-posted here. It uses the term “protesters” interchangeably with “mercenaries,” and the paranoid idea seems to be the same:
“Abdallah: yes there are pro gaddafi protests: but they are not Libyan, they are Africans they are killing everybody. As libyans we expected this from #gaddafi, recruiting protesters to fight us from Africa namely Chad #Libya #Feb17 he warned us about this. #Qaddafi has threatened to flatten #Benghazi and rebuild it, and place in it African Migrants. African mercenaries now in #Benghazi #Libya sources in Libya say they’re chasing and killing people with knives and swords. We only fear God”

ABC News (US), Feb 22: Gadhafi’s Private Mercenary Army ‘Know One Thing: to Kill

Moammar Gadhafi is using foreign mercenaries from Africa who don’t speak Arabic, as a private army to protect his regime and they have shown no hesitancy to fire on civilian protesters, witnesses have said. A doctor in Benghazi told ABC News several foreign mercenaries were captured by Libyan police who have sided with the protesters. […] “They know one thing: to kill whose in front of them. Nothing else,” said the doctor who was reached by phone, but asked to not be publicly identified. “They’re killing people in cold blood.” The doctor said he didn’t know which country the mercenaries were from, but said they were black, spoke French and were identified by wearing yellow hats. “They have special forces bringing in from outside Libya,” he said. “They bring from Africa some military forces, I don’t know, some special army, put them in Benghazi and in Tripoli now.”

These yellow helmets can be seen famously bobbing around in a crowded street, as they’re said to be terrorizing or massacring protesters. This video is something I’ve analyzed in detail in another post, in video and words. It only shows some kind of security men guarding some green doors. Two or maybe three possible protesters run into their ranks and perhaps get arrested. At the end, the gaurds get the door open and start going inside. An insightful early article by T. Miles (Feb 20)delved into Libya’s  racism problem in connection with these emergent allegations.

CNN has just prominently shown a Libyan woman, tear stained, crying out on the newly liberated streets of Egypt. She calls for justice for her people, for the killing to end, begs Obama to intervene, and then repeats “Gaddafi is killing us with his Africans!” She is not alone in arranging this revolution between the Libyan people on one side, and Gaddafi, his family, and dark-skinned “outsiders” on the other. For the benefit of those unfamiliar with the use of a map, Libyans are Africans.But Africans here means “black people” and there is a very long very pernicious racism in their part of the world towards “black Africans”, not unlike that in my part of the world. When I see tweets like the following, I cringe. I also see a history of fear and contempt slipping out in a time of unparalleled suffering.

Gaddafi is ordering african mercenaries to break into homes in #Benghazi to RAPE Libyan women in order to detract men protesters!

This last was a common theme, supported with no credible evidence. In connection with mass rape charges, Afro-Mercs are frequently invoked as sexual boogeymen, as can be seen in the post “Rape Allegations Ganging up on Gaddafi.” The examples of reckless mainstream media bullhorning of these alarmist allegations are too legion to bother with. Just two egregious examples from one outfit, the UK Telegraph will stand-in: a video of Feb 20: ‘foreign mercenaries using heavy weapons against demonstrators‘ and an article of Feb 27: African mercenaries in Libya nervously await their fate. Some took the notion of Black African fighters to ridiculous extremes. One Canadian Twitter twit accused these villains of being government slaves raised from birth to kill. “Confirmed the African mercenaries were raised in campus [sic] around Sabha and West Mountain since childhood as salves [sic].” [source] If these bred killers had lived in Libya since childhood, are they really foreigners? Another silly take passed on by Maximilian Forte, Monthly Review, April 20

While a spokesman for the TNC alleged that a whole army of 3,500 fighters from Chad was responsible for the slaughter of “thousands” of opposition fighters and their withdrawal from frontline cities between Benghazi and Tripoli, actual footage obtained from Al Jazeera, showing government forces moving through one such frontline area, shows absolutely no evidence of this Chadian army or of any apparent mercenaries. As far as I know, TNC spokespersons have remained silent on this.

A strangely credulous dispatch from the UK Guardian, February 22, which I previously overlooked, adds some detail to the allegations.

Witness accounts seem to bear out the claims. One resident of Tripoli was quoted by Reuters: “Gaddafi obviously does not have any limits. We knew he was crazy, but it’s still a terrible shock to see him turning mercenaries on his own people and just mowing down unarmed demonstrators.” Saddam, a 21-year-old university student in Bayda, claimed mercenaries had killed 150 people in two days. “The police opened fire at us,” he said. “My friend Khaled was the first martyr to fall and seven others died with him. “The next day, we were shocked to see mercenaries from Chad, Tunisia, Morocco speaking French attacking us … We captured some of the mercenaries and they said they were given orders by Gaddafi to eliminate the protesters.” […] Ibrahim Jibreel, a Libyan political activist, told al-Jazeera that some had been in the country for months, based in training camps in the south, as if in anticipation of such an uprising. Others had been flown in at short notice, he said.

That’s some specialized and unlikely knowledge these guys claim to have. And did these simple folks understand the importance of what they were witnessing with their own eyes and reporting truthfully? Implications: The negative fall-out of these troubling claims were of two broad types – those against the government of Libya (intended), and those against non-mercenary black men in Libya (if not intended, not hard to predict either) Implications for the Libyan government said to employ these savages: The main hit against the Gaddafi regime of this Afro-Merc fever was helping create the image the leader had lost his legitimate military to defections to the rebel side – they went to “the people.” It was later noticed how little of the army – aside from its weapons – showed up in the rebel ranks, and how much of it NATO had to bomb. But before these twin facts became clear, Gaddafi was presented as stripped of the native force’s loyalty, explaining why he bought up some cheap slaves as a “personal army” to throw at “his people.” A point that was quickly decided about these foreign mercenaries is that they must have been flown in to kill innocents, especially to airports in the south (where some of the Black soldiers were flown from there). This in turn became a factor in imposing a no-fly zone and air embargo against the regime, to prevent the arrival of more “mercenaries.”

The merc meme has also damaged by discrediting Gaddafi’s long-standing policy of African unity. It re-brands his empowering policies, continent-wide aid projects, and encouragement of immigration into a crime against humanity.And paying the Afro-Mercs to replace the army was a factor in the U.S. freezing of tens of billions of dollars of Libya’s sovereign funds – at least for each man, woman, and child on all sides, who won’t get it back ’til they agree to shake Gaddafi.Although the idea has faded some with time (see below, it was debunked), as recently as July 25, Newsweek ran an “expert” and his poetic opinions.In part,he said:

As for Libya, Gaddafi has no future. The day his mercenaries grow weary, he will fall.

Implications For Black Men in Rebel Hotspots:

Christian Science Monitor’s credulous report of Feb 28 Libya’s mercenaries pose difficult issue to resolve 
Muammar Qaddafi is likely relying heavily on African mercenaries, but if Libya falls to the anti-Qaddafi protesters, they’re the ones who will have to figure out what to do with them.

Oh they figured it out, as it fell to them bit by bit. As an unnamed rebel soldier was quoted referring to the unfounded allegations of mercenary violence: “After what happened here, we lost faith in every black guy that’s walking around. So especially if he doesn’t have a passport, we just grab him.” [source] Some suspects were released quietly as innocent after all, but others were first lynched, bludgeoned, burneed, tortured, decapitated, and so on. Rebel treatment of suspect mercenaries who weren’t quick enough to flee can be to some extent seen here: Routinely, black-skinned prisoners were singled out for worse treatment and more frequent, and brutal, degradation and summary execution. And then more degradation, usually. What can you expect from irrational fanatics who run around believing things like these guys were part of a murder and rape conspiracy against themselves? Based on skin color, maybe language, paperwork… Many other were thus chased away in fear. Refugees fleeing racist-infesteed Misrata, especially, in rickety refugee ships that have an unhappy habit of sinking – at least four so far, with many hundreds left dead. (Italy, swamped with most of the survivors, likely breaths a sigh of relief mixed with sadness each time). American National Public Radio did a piece on February 25 (after earlier reporting mercenaries as fact), called “In Libya, African Migrants Say They Face Hostility.” What kind of hostility did they claim to face? A Turkish oil field worker had to speak for some of them:

“We left behind our friends [so-workers] from Chad. We left behind their bodies. We had 70 or 80 people from Chad working for our company. They cut them dead with pruning shears and axes, attacking them, saying you’re providing troops for Gadhafi. The Sudanese, the Chadians were massacred. We saw it ourselves.” 

A famous video published on Feb 19 (still at left) shows the corpse of an “African Mercenary” killed and shown to a camera, described as seeming to be from Chad. But as has been noted, he seems to be wearing the uniform of Libya’s internal security forces. As far as anyone knows, they only hire Libyans. The “Chad mercenary” was, according to an online posting, killed in Az Zintan, south of Tripoli. He seems to have been tortured – perhaps into confessing he was a mercenary. What else explains these grave injuries to a finger, his nose, and his cheeks? Others fled or otherwise left that town in the same days – in March the same security man was re-discovered dumped in the desert, and in late May, at least twelve bodies of black men were found in the desert south of Az Zintan. Each in his unique civilian clothes and frozen in his own final pathos, they were found half-mummified by prolonged exposure. I suspect they died there about two months prior.

The sickening description at that Liveleak posting (by a “Mr. Creosote” no less) says: “The survivors [sic] of a gang of Nigerian mercenary wretches [sic] who were forced to flee into the desert south of Az-Zintan are kept alive [??] by the heroes of free Libya. The gang fled into the desert without water, after coming under concerted attack.” Why did the “mercenary wretches” cross the Sahara? To get to the other side? I don’t think so. At the end of the video, at least two living black man are shown being watered and cared for by someone. These tack-ons look emaciated, but clearly not “survivors” of the same doomed party as it was found and shown. Perhaps they were the ones who made it back to town after they were all dropped off for dead. In the long run, this epic episode of violence is likely to create a lasting rift between Africa and Libya, if the rebels who oversaw the slaughter manage to gain control. And in the short-term, it robbed uprising hot-spots of a known source of regime support. Blacks there, especially dual-nationals and immigrants, tend to support Gaddafi just as Blacks in the United States tend to vote democrat. They make as obvious a target to anti-Gaddafi rebels as certain Florida voters did to anti-Gore Bush family members in 2000. I now have a video on this subject, showing much of this and more. I’ll go ahead and re-embed it here. Do be warned, it’s meant to be upsetting stuff. There’s blood and hate, dead people and bad people, and spooky music.

Refutations: The refutations started coming in almost as soon as the allegations, but were somehow ignored as the implications rolled ahead heedless.VOA Nearly Level, Souare’s Doubts Voice of America even, on March 1, cited two experts, one supportive of merc use and one not, neither supporting anything like the massive threat the rebels claimed to fear.

It is unclear how many mercenaries Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi has deployed against Libyan protesters, but African analysts such as Na’eem Jeenah, executive director of the Afro-Middle East Centre in Johannesburg, suggest the number is relatively low. “It is difficult to say exactly how many mercenaries are operating in Libya and how widespread it is, but I think it is safe to say that they number at least in the hundreds,” said Jeenah. Jeenah and other analysts says Gadhafi has a long history of using mercenaries […] “And so yes, they can be called up at short notice therefore, called up at short notice, transported in to the country as [some have] been, etc.”

In contrast, Issaka Souare, senior researcher at the Institute for Security Studies:

“The reason why I doubt the thesis is that we started hearing these claims just the third day of the revolt, and I would imagine it would take some time before you really can go and have recourse to these mercenaries, unless you are foreseeing that your own army is not going to be loyal to you,” said Souare. […] I don’t exclude the possibility through migration that some sub-Saharans have integrated, having taken the Libyan nationality, have integrated [into] the Libyan army, or that Gadhafi at some point created a militia formed mainly of these people, and that these are deployed, and then protesters see these, conclude that no they are mercenaries.” [emph. mine]

The bolding is important to consider – a basic reason the whole paranoid construct fails to even make much sense. The whole rebellion was a surprise – protests were known of, unrest likely, but this … if they’d known, there are other things besides pre-positioning Afro-Mercs that would have been done (like beefing up the defense of army bases). Mr. Souare was also cited by the Guardian. On the 22nd, he was reported as saying:

“In the south of Libya you do have people of sub-Sarahan origin, including Hausa speakers. Some might have integrated into the Libyan army and these would probably be among the first to be deployed. It will then be easy for people to say they are foreign mercenaries. “People started talking about this issue on the third day, but I think Gaddafi should have had sufficient resources to deal with the protests before resorting to mercenaries. How long would it take Gaddafi to get mercenaries together and deploy them? Maybe a week. So I see it as unlikely at this stage, but it could happen if army defections continue.”

HRW and Bouckaert: “No mercenaries in eastern Libya”In a March 2 interview with Radio Netherlands Worldwide, Peter Bouckaert – emergencies director for Human Rights Watch – refuted the claims, after going to Al Baidah. This was to investigate reports that 156 mercenaries had been arrested there, and should be a good opportunity to verify at least a few.

The rights investigator said that what he found there were, in fact, 156 soldiers from the south of Libya and not from another African country. After talking to them he found out that they were all black Libyans of African descent. The soldiers have since been released by the protesters. According to Bouckaert, the support of the black southern Libyans for the Gaddafi regime is explicable as Gaddafi fought to counter discrimination against this group in Libyan society.

“Thousands of Africans” have come under attack in Libya, fueled by “hysteria” that mercenaries are involved in significant fighting. “Many of these Africans have been the target of attacks by enraged Libyans because of these rumors,” said Bouckaert.[…] “There are dark-skinned Libyans in the south of the country who are largely loyal to Qaddafi because he did take steps to end systematic discrimination against dark-skinned Libyans,” said Bouckaert.

[The claims about mercenaries] were rashly disseminated by local residents and carelessly peddled by the foreign press. “This is a prime example of lazy, irresponsible journalism on the part of the mainstream media who publish rumors as truth,” said Peter Bouckaert, the emergencies director for Human Rights Watch.

CIRET-AVT/CF2R International Center for Research and Study on Terrorism and Aid to Victims of Terrorism (CIRET-AVT) and the French Center for Research on Intelligence (CF2R) sent a joint team of their top people and a translator to sort through “disinformation” and chatter to get a clear view. Throught the month of April they visited both sides, received statements and supporting evidence, and reported at the end of May. Their findings on Mercenaries adds some nuance, finding foreign fighters presence at some fairly early point, but under circumstances much different from those alleged. There’s no evidence any of these real foreign fighters were among those lynched by the hundreds and arrested by thousands. July: The Smack-down: Amnesty International, HRW, Others, Dismiss the Hoax with Force AI and other experts, including HRW again, came out in late June with more solid doubts yet. Independent, UK:

Nato leaders, opposition groups and the media have produced a stream of stories since the start of the insurrection on 15 February, claiming the Gaddafi regime has ordered mass rapes, used foreign mercenaries and employed helicopters against civilian protesters. An investigation by Amnesty International has failed to find evidence for these human rights violations and in many cases has discredited or cast doubt on them. It also found indications that on several occasions the rebels in Benghazi appeared to have knowingly made false claims or manufactured evidence.

My observation here – their more astute plotters learned from watching the best – the Anglo-American propaganda machine against Libya, the ones responsible for the travesty of the Lockerbie “investigation.”

My take on this development, with larger excerpts

Thursday, August 11, 2011

Video: How the Rebels Gave Africa the Boot

How Freedom* Came to Libya, part 2: How the Rebels Gave Africa the Boot August 11, 2011Here, the video. Warning, it’s graphic and creepy in spots. See part one here. More notes or explanation, etc., perhaps forthcoming.

Wednesday, August 10, 2011

The Qawalish Basin Massacre, via … New York Times?

July 21, 2011News of Abuses With a little illegal help with air-dropped weapons, rebel forces in the western Nafusah mountains have in July been able to expand their holdings from Az Zintan outward to towns like Qawalish, aka Gualish, between Mizdah and Gherian in the desert of southwestern Libya. There the liberators discovered a number of “African mercenaries”, and trumpeted to the world as supporting the claim they’d been making since February 18. As NPR found, Gaddafi’s army was “hiring sub-Saharan Africans” to replace those lost in the war, but upon inspection “they aren’t the fearsome mercenaries described by many rebels.” They were all amateurs, culled from Libya’s body of undocumented workers, and simply didn’t exist as a force before April at the earliest.It seems that the rebels were less forthcoming with some others among the town’s defenders, and we have New York Times columnist C.J. Chivers and his towering photographer Bryan Denton to thank. He wrote on July 10 about abuses during the taking of Qawalish, whose entire populationhad fled in advance, as if the Mongols were coming. It then became evident why – Chivers witnessed open and massive looting (especially of grains, animal feed, and straw, possibly “punitive,” he thought) and burning certain homes (especially of the loyalist Mashaashia tribe). They drained the only gas station of fuel, and then burned the place. Sounds a bit punitive, and highly criminal, to me. He also noted:

What was obvious and beyond dispute by Sunday was only this: Whatever their motivation, the behavior of rebels in Qawalish, who have been supported by the NATO military campaign against Colonel Qaddafi, was at odds with the NATO mandate to protect civilians and civilian infrastructure, and at odds with rebel pledges to free and protect the Libyan population. Moreover, the leadership of the Free Libyan Forces, for all the statements otherwise, appeared to lack the ability or inclination to prevent these crimes. […] The rebels say they plan to push further through the mountains soon, toward the city of Garyan. Will the villages along the way suffer Qawalish’s fate?

On July 12, Chivers reported backwith the supportive findings of Human Rights Watch, adding news of reprisal beating across the area.

Col. Mukhtar Farnana, the region’s senior commander, said that reprisals were not sanctioned and that he did not know any details about them. But Human Rights Watch said the same commander shared details with its investigators and conceded that rebels had abused people suspected of being collaborators as towns changed hands. “People who stayed in the towns were working with the army,” the organization quoted him as saying. “Houses that were robbed and broken into were ones that the army had used, including for ammunition storage.” The commander added, “Those people who were beaten were working for Qaddafi’s brigades.”

Maybe some of them were patriots like that – it might just take a team effort, civilian and government, to turn back the no-longer civilian rebel forces and their multi-government outside support, and its air power presence. The local commanders might have hit on something their soft-hearted patrons don’t realize – maybe starving out these cities and clearing them of loyalist people – everyone if necessary – is the only way to free those towns the way NATO and the rebels want. Destroying villages to save them is nothing new. Nothing New Daniel Larison at the American Conservative, on July 11, called Chivers’ dispatch “a balanced, detailed report,” but astutely noted:

The depressing thing about Chivers’ report is that this sort of behavior from an ill-disciplined insurgent force advancing into likely hostile territory is completely unsurprising and entirely to be expected.

Indeed, amazing and relevant as the reportage is, the public shock comes across as naive. These atterns especially apply in Libya, 2011, where the spirited, “Allahu Akbar” shouting, weapon-confiscating, absolved-of-everything buggers at first gleefully filmed themselves butchering their captives, as can be seen in their own Rebel Atrocity Videos. Most of their victims were military, but some were foreign workers, and at least one was a truck driver from the Warfalla tribe. Mr. Hamza al-Gheit Fughi, was executed in March; the assassins filmed themselves painstakingly removing his head with a knife, for refusing to denounce Gaddafi. By and large, these artifacts of cruelty show black-skinned men beaten, hanged, shot, hacked, burnt, degraded, displayed, and always called African mercenaries. If what the experts have found so far holds across the field, none of themwere mercenaries, but those things did happen to them.

Aside: NATO’s foot soldiers in old barbary are barbarians. 
To the shores of Tripoli they’re pointed, ready to wash it in blood if need be. 
Between red blood shed and funeral black, they’re doing their part in earnest 
to add their colors to the new flag. (any poet who wants to re-work it, go ahead) 

These recordings were made all across Libya, but most relevant here (see below) are two examples, both from the Nafusah region we’re considering here, of victims’ bodies tossed out like garbage. This crime adds insult to injury, since Islamic law mandates a proper burial within 24 hours. An internal security soldier was tortured and killed by rebels, in crucial Az Zintan, on February 19. Shown to the world as an Afro-Merc (Chad), his body was found again and filmed two weeks later in the desert. Another twelve or more alleged mercenaries (Nigeria) – but in civilian clothes – were filmed in late May, long-dead and mummified in the desert south of Zintan. Predictable Brutality: Bottom of the Basin  There is an allegation in a video, which I was alerted to in comments below, that at least four civilians were executed in their home in reportedly empty Qawalish, while al-Jazeera was filming (from the outside, and apparently ignored the deaths inside). Otherwise, the reportage so far doesn’t seem to reflect the killing of any civilians, loyalist or otherwise, in this region. But it does now reveal killings of those in the line of duty, along the lines of their earlier known rampages, as seen on Youtube. Since March, we’ve seen less of those atrocity videos, because the rebels either got more civilized, ran out of victims or steam, or became more discreet about their abuses. Chivers’ next finding suggests the last option is closest to the mark. A photo-based piece collaborating with Denton, it chronicles their discovery of “the rotting remains of five men whose bodies had been hiddenin a cement basin on the road outside Qawalish.” Again, clearly not a proper burial. The text, with one photo, is as follows:

Most of the pictures in that sequence are too gruesome to publish here. The dead men appeared to be wearing the olive green uniforms of pro-Qaddafi forces.

There were signs suggesting they had been executed and then lifted atop the basin and dropped down this hatch and hidden away from view. One of the men had his pants bunched down around his ankles. Another appeared to have been beheaded, though the orientation of the bodies made this not quite possible to verify without entering the basin […] Who were these men? Who killed them? Why? None of this was clear. A sixth rotting body was buried under one of the olive trees to the left.

More recently yet, he added this on the rebel response:

Since those reports, questions surrounding what happened to these men have found traction among other news agencies, and reports from other journalists are forthcoming. And since then the site has been bulldozed. […] The corpses, apparently, have been covered with this mound of soil, below, which is a few meters away from where the remains were first found. Rebels now say the dead men were given proper Muslim burials. We’ll leave to you to decide if the grounds in these images looks like a proper, religious or respectful burial.

An Equally Predictable Denial

What happened to these men remains an open question. But official rebel sources have made their position clear, insisting that these are the remains of Qaddafi soldiers killed and hidden by other Qaddafi soldiers. The evidence for that claim is, principally, that the rebels say so. The possibility that some of rebels might have done this to their enemies has been rejected outright.

This as well is nothing new. It was the “protesters” who were well-known for using fire as a weapon against government buildings in February. But whenever charred corpses were found in those days, they were filmed and shown as victims of Gaddafi’s mercenaries – soldiers burned alive for refusing to shoot innocent protesters. The world just needed to see the horror for themselves, they explained in apology for so shocking us. When 21 soldiers were were found in al Baida, bound and with their heads blown off, the same story was given, and still accepted, despite video proof the rebels themselves ordered the killings. Chivers also added the dumpers chose their spot poorly, the basin being visible from the main road to Qawalish. Upon simply walking up to this odd spot, “the blood stains on the concrete, and tire treads on the soft soil” were clear, along with a scrap of green clothing, and even a picture of a handsome black-skinned man in uniform, perhaps one of the victims. These things they photographed but left, and they’re all gone now. He closes with a promising sign that freedom and openness are finally, at such great cost, coming to Libya – now that the rebels are being called the government of the place by people like Barrack Obama. No more massacres, cover-ups and lame excuses, and government minders controlling the press. As Chivers and Denton saw the bulldozed area on the road days later:

we tried to stop to learn more. Our driver refused, announcing that he was under orders from the rebel military leadership not to allow us near the site. It seemed, he said, that doctors were worried that journalists might be exposed to unhealthy conditions near the rotting remains. This did not quite pass the sniff test, so we pressed. Then came a different answer — the rebel military council had simply told him, without notifying us, that he was not to take us there, and that was that. That was Saturday.

Either way, we know enough for now to know what’s needed next are these things: – The rebel authorities need to get those bodies identified,buried properly, and their families noted. – Wherever they live, CNN should ask these families how they feel about the condolences of the new “government of Libya.” – Find out if anyone else is missing. – Start pressing the rebels there for straight answers. Do they, or do they not, work for us? How many were killed in Qawalish and the other towns and hastily stashed around? Six only is suspiciously low. Update August 10: It seems Mr. Chivers and Denton saw the bodies first in the well, but not after they were removed. Between their removal and burial of whatever sort, it seems the bodies were laid out and observed by, among others, a reporter from the UK Telegraph. They reported on Jul 20, a day before I first got this thing up, a story completely in line with what the New York Times people saw. Five bodies werein the basin, no more (I forgot to check if they even mentioned the sixth guy buried under a tree). The five looked like government soldiers, and had been floating face-down. The body Chivers said “appeared to have been beheaded” was “cleanly decapitated.” The other with “his pants bunched down around his ankles” is confirmed with “the trousers of another had been ripped down to his ankles, a way of humiliating a dead enemy.” There is a photograph attached to the article of some men standing around looking, with only one of the victim’s hands visible in the foreground. The site was bulldozed, the Telegraph confirmed, the burial situation unclear, and an investigation was in order. What might prove more interesting than six killed soldiers is the separate Qala’a massacre, revealed August 7, from about 30 miles away at Qala’a. For this we have video, but no clear date or details, of 30-34 slaughtered civilians. Rebel supporters instantly asserted this was the government’s work, but some say the rebels did it. I think a wee bit of study is in order, and perhaps quite a bit, if needed. This puzzle might be easy to solve.

Older Posts

NATO Loots Libyan Gold As Tripoli Falls

As we reported 6 weeks ago, final assault was planned before September deadline Paul Joseph Monday, 22 August 2011 Precisely as we predicted last month, NATO forces and their Al-Qaeda backed rebels launched a massive assault on Tripoli in order to wrap up the looting and conquest of Libya in time for crucial talks at the UN on Palestinian statehood set to begin in less than two weeks.

On July 8th in an article entitled, U.S. Wants Gaddafi Toppled By September, we reported, “The United States and France have set a deadline of September 2nd to topple Libyan leader Colonel Muammar Gaddafi, with NATO powers ready to inflict a crushing blow if Gaddafi refuses to step down peacefully.” That crushing blow is now in full effect as reports circulate of well over a thousand dead with thousands more wounded during weekend battles, led by by NATO warships and fighter jets as part of “Operation Mermaid Dawn,”which led to the capture of Gaddafi’s sons as Gaddafi himself reportedly went into hiding. RAF fighter jets were deployed to attack key regime targets while the media pretended the whole assault was an organic uprising by the Libyan people, endlessly replaying footage of celebrating crowds. In another report published on July 15, we stated that NATO powers and the rebel army would launch a final bombardment of Tripoli within 6-8 weeks if Gaddafi refused to step down, which is exactly what unfolded just shy of 6 weeks later. Barack Obama and David Cameron are now busy milking the spectacle with tough talk as if they led the assault personally. In reality, the conquest of Libya represents little more than another act of colonial looting on behalf of the NATO war machine, with Syria the next target in its cross hairs. The war was launched, with the gleeful support of the western corporate media, on the hoax that Gaddafi’s government was slaughtering “protesters” en masse. In reality, these “protesters” had commandeered military tanks and fighter jets. For weeks, the establishment press re-branded what was a civil war as a brutal series of crimes against humanity by Gaddafi’s regime, just long enough for the United Nations to pass a “no fly zone” resolution that instantly turned into a massive NATO bombardment overnight. Global central banks will now get to carve up Africa’s most oil-rich nation while simultaneously divvying up around 144 tons of gold bullion– which might go some way to repaying Hugo Chavez after his announcement that Venezuela is to nationalize its precious metals industry. Unless of course Chavez becomes the next head on the chopping block for another “humanitarian intervention.”

The attack on Libya, spearheaded by Obama without Congressional approval, against the advice of his own constitutional lawyers, and on a promise that the conflict would last “days not weeks,” was a brazen illustration of how the so-called “war on terror” was a cruel hoax. From the very beginning, and in violation of their own resolution, NATO powers armed, funded and trained Al-Qaeda militants who had killed U.S. troops, setting them up to command the rebels in the march towards Tripoli. As the Wall Street Journal reported in a piece entitled, Ex-Mujahedeen Help Lead Libyan Rebels, Al-Qaeda terrorists who worked directly for Bin Laden were tasked with recruiting, training and acting as front line field commanders for the rebel army. The entire scope of the war was about capturing Libya as another launch pad for further empire building in the Middle East and north Africa, which is why PNAC neo-cons ordered “Peace Laureate” Obama to do it in the first place. The conquest was about securing the richest oil resources in the whole of Africa, it was about stealing 6 billion dollars in gold reserves, and it was about putting a halt to China’s efforts to virtually re-colonize Africa. Although Gaddafi was obviously an autocratic dictator, he did reinvest much of Libya’s oil wealth back into the country, transforming it into one of the most well-developed nations in the whole region, which is why a lot of the middle classes in major cities retained their support for the Libyan leader. All that is set to change now that NATO forces and the central banks that stand behind them will finally get the opportunity to properly plunder Libya for all it has. Living standards will plummet, corrupt strong men will take control with globalist blessings and run the country into the ground for their own good, so long as they allow NATO and US air force bases to be constructed throughout the land. Save for any last minute counter-attack by Gaddafi forces, the globalist war machine can now focus on toppling its next domino on the road to world domination. Rest assured, whether its Syria, Iran, Pakistan or anywhere else, a suitable hoax will be invented as a pretext for invasion and the western establishment media will slavishly create the perfect narrative for a bloody assault disguised as a humanitarian outreach. ********************* Paul Joseph Watson is the editor and writer for Prison He is the author of Order Out Of Chaos. Watson is also a regular fill-in host for The Alex Jones Show.

Tuesday, August 23, 2011

Libya: NATO Psy-Op Collapses – Qaddafi Prevails Again
NATO bluff called by Qaddafi; rebels’ victory facade crumbles.

Tony Cartalucci, Contributing Writer Activist Post Update: You can’t make this up – the International Criminal Court (ICC) now claims it never confirmed that Qaddafi’s son Saif Al-Islam was captured. Here is the Telegraph article quoting ICC prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo as having indeed confirmed his capture. Here is a farcical Reuters report now claiming such a confirmation was never claimed. ICC prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo should resign, so should editors at both the Telegraph and Reuters and a myriad of other media agencies complicit in spreading this willful and malicious propaganda. August 23, 2011 – Once again a defiant Qaddafi has prevailed against the full might of NATO aggression including a murderous bombing campaign followed by NATO special forces on the ground supporting mobs of US/UK/French/Qatari backed Al Qaeda thugs which swarmed Tripoli over the weekend. “Illustrious” news agencies from the Qatari government’s AlJazeera, to the now exposed frauds at CNN, BBC, Reuters, AP, AFP have been caught perpetuating a concerted war propaganda campaign in order to break the will of both Libya and in particular Tripoli. Photo: Taken overnight, Qaddafi’s son Saif Al-Islam “confirmed” to be captured and ready to be transferred to the Hague by the illegitimate International Criminal Court, is actually very much free and leading efforts to drive out NATO backed Al Qaeda thugs from Tripoli. Reports that Qaddafi’s son Saif Al-Islam was “captured” by Libyan rebels by the disingenuous media outlets and “confirmed” by the Fortune 500 contrived International Criminal Court (ICC), who went as far as saying preparations were already under way to transfer Saif to the Hague, are now confirmed lies with Saif Al-Islam very much free, appearing to journalists at the Rixos Hotel in southern Tripoli flanked by Libyan military forces and very much leading what appears to be a significant Libyan government counterattack. It appears that NATO operations are ending just as they began, based on a verified pack of lies. (Please see March’s “Libya: Another War, Another Pack of Lies“) Everything we have been told, from President Obama’s teleprompter readings to Luis Moreno-Ocampo of the ICC’s claims of Saif’s “confirmed” capture, to the mainstream media and the Al Qaeda infested “Transitional National Council” are now systematically being exposed as overt, verified lies as part of what may be the biggest psychological operation in modern history. Al Jazeera who was already featuring lofty “The Last Days of Gaddafi” narratives is now forced to face reality and irrefutable evidence that the rebel operations in Tripoli were clearly over-hyped war propaganda and the reality is Qaddafi and the Libyan people have called NATO’s bluff. To illustrate just how absurd the Western media has become as their lies break upon the rocks of reality, a recent farcical attempt to save face regarding Saif’s appearance before journalists at the Riox included an Al Jazeera report claiming that rebel leaders had confirmation Saif al-Islam was arrested “but have no idea how he escaped.” To help out the media it might be suggested that Saif was never captured in the first place and that reports of his arrest were simply a ploy to embolden rebels and make it appear as if the momentum had swung in favor of NATO. (For more on US State Department lies rehashed through “media” please see: “Libyan Rebels Lying Left and Right“) Image: Here, the International Criminal Court “confirms” the now verified liethat Saif Al-Islam was being held by rebels. ICC prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo, in a fit of unmitigated lies claimed, “we have confidential information from different sources that we have within Libya confirming this.” He would continue, “it is very important to make clear there is an obligation to surrender Saif to the ICC in accordance with the Security Council resolution.” Along with UN Chief Ban Ki-Moon’s claim that the “international community” is obligated to comply to the ICC we see unfolding a criminal organization of liars and degenerates of unprecedented proportions.


What follows next is unsure. With Council on Foreign Relations president Richard Haas and others calling for an expedient landing of NATO occupation forces it seems they above all others knew just how tenuous the rebels’ hold on Tripoli was. As explained previously, the war in Libya goes beyond pilfering the nation’s material wealth, it is about establishing the Wall Street-London international order and its primacy over the nation-state. A NATO failure in Libya would infinitely complicate planned operations against Syria, Iran, and along Russia and China’s peripheries. While it appears that NATO’s last ditch murder spree has failed, with so much on the table, everything from continuous carpet bombing to a NATO land invasion under the guise of UN “peace monitors” or Haas’ NATO occupation forces are possibilities already being planned. What we do know is how desperate the corporate-financier elite are and how absolute their control is over the mainstream media. Such a large, wide scale disinformation campaign is only possible if each news agency, from AP, Reuters, BBC, Guardian, Telegraph, New York Times, CNN, Al Jazeera and others, are completely compromised by corporate-financier interests. The following lists shows that indeed many of these “news agencies” share consortium memberships with some of the largest corporate-financier interests on earth presenting an immense conflict of interest obviously producing astronomically duplicitous improprieties. Council on Foreign Relations Chatham House (Major Corporate Members) Chatham House (Corporate Members) Chatham House (Corporate Partners) Brookings Institution (page 20 of Annual Report) When we see Reuters sitting side-by-side oil giants like BP, Exxon, Chevron within the halls of the Council on Foreign Relations and the Chatham House and then see reports gloating over Western oil companies moving in to replace Chinese and Russian investments in Libya, their duplicity and lack of independence in their reporting becomes glaringly obvious. These media organizations are in fact PR fronts for the Fortune 500 and their collective goal of implementing a global empire, nation to nation. For now, they are currently obsessed over Libya and the implications its conclusion will have on their future planned conquests, the next being Syria. It would be a good idea for those following the current NATO murder spree in Libya to abandon any trust in Reuters, BBC, CNN, MSNBC, CBS, NBC, ABC, and any of the “reputable” newspapers wasting paper and space on our nations’ newsstands, all of whose fates are tied directly to the corporate-financier interests pinning their hopes on a NATO victory in Libya. Instead, we must commit ourselves to vetting reliable alternative news sources as well as committing ourselves to the responsible of researching the news of the day on our own. Let this be proof positive as to how essential it is to boycott and replace everything eminating from the Fortune 500 including their army of professional liars also known as the “mainstream media.” For more information on Libya, please read through the Libya Archives. Tony Cartalucci’s articles have appeared on many alternative media websites, including his own at  Land Destroyer Report.


Day 154: 22. august 2011. Libya news  [Battle for Tripoli]

23h/ French troops landed on the coastal highway of Tripoli!!!!!! URGENT!!!!! 23h/ NATO will be targeting residential compounds in Misurata rocket and then trying to stick the charge in the armed forces by accusing people of using Scud missiles to cover up and to mobilize people after failing in the battle of Tripoli 23h/ The CNN news said rebels control Tripoli and they are pointing at Tripoli in Lebanon. BY The truth about Libya 5.50pm: Defence expert Robert Fox is telling the BBC special forces from Qatar and the UAE, with US, British and French training, are responsible for the successful attack on Tripoli. “It has been a genuine Arab coalition ??? … I think it was the Qataris that led them through the breach. 22h/ International Criminal Court (ICC) now claims it never confirmed that Qaddafi’s son Saif Al-Islam was captured. [horror] 21h/ Russia won’t recognize National Transitional Council – Lavrov. “Russia is ready to actively promote a political process in Libya, just as in other countries,” he said. “The Russian and Libyan peoples have traditions of friendship, years-long interaction, and we shall continue to act in this vein in the future as well.” 21h/  MOSCOW, August 23 (Reuters) – The head of the Russian Chess Federation Kirsan Alaumajanov on Tuesday that Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi had told him by telephone that he was still alive and in Tripoli Faishh good does not intend to leave the city. The Alaumajanov, who visited Libya during the bombing campaign of NATO and met with Gaddafi that the eldest son of Mohammed Gaddafi spoke to him by telephone this afternoon. The Alaumajanov told Reuters by phone “gave the phone to his father, who said he was in Tripoli and alive and well and ready to fight to the finish…  20h/ “Volunteers number 600.000 from outside Tripoli , they come from the cities around Tripoli ready to fight . Believe me it’s under control , the only problem there is no TV but the people inside Tripoli know the truth”

19h/ #Libya: UK readying occupation force for Libya…seeking UN resolution to introduce them as peacekeepers 18h/ Thierry Meyssan from Rixos Hotel in Tripoli *** Tripoli is still under Libyan govt control: to rename Green Square is an unacceptable political act by google 

 ?? Google-maps has already renamed the Green Square into Martyrs Square ??
This is a real propaganda-war

17h/ Battle for Libya: news 23. August 2011. Saif Al Islam Gaddafi Interview in Tripoli, Speech of Dr Mousa Ibrahim to the press. 23-8-2011

Saif Al Islam on Sqare in Tripoly with Libyans 
13:20h/ News: Director of the General Authority for Libyan radio stations: building radio stations have been bombed, and any talk of rebel control is unfounded. 16h/ Over the past months the armed NATO-led terrorist movement in Libya has been illegally legitimized by terrorist supporting countries, and now also by Google Maps.
16h/ Rome, 23 August (AKI) -Libya: Gaddafi ‘unlikely to surrender’ says Rome ambassador. Libya’s embattled leader Muammar Gaddafi will either flee the country or will be captured but is unlikely to surrender, the country’s ambassador to Italy, Abdulhafed Gaddur, told Italian public radio Tuesday.
16h/ The top U.S. admiral involved in the Libya war admitted to a U.S. congressman that NATO forces are trying to kill Libyan leader Muammar al-Qaddafi. The same admiral also said he anticipated the need for ground troops in Libya after Qaddafi falls, according to the lawmaker.
15h/ NATO’s War Crimes in Libya. It’s a story CNN won’t report. Late at night there’s a pounding on the door in Misur ata. Armed soldiers force young Libyan women out of their beds at gun-point. Hustling the women and teenagers into trucks, the soldiers rush the women to gang bang parties for NATO rebels—or else rape them in front of their husbands or fathers. When NATO rebels finish their rape sport, the soldiers cut the women’s throats.
15h/ Allies guided rebel ‘pincer’ assault on Tripoli – As Gaddafi’s forces took up positions to defend the capital, “the targeting shifted toward Tripoli over the last four or five days . . . and the target set [in the capital] became larger,” said a senior NATO official.
14h/ Breaking: Head of Al-Qaeda in #Benghazi said #NTC Abdul “NATO” Jalil does not represent them they reject idea of unity Force, DANGER, RT
13h/ Libya – NATO Wanted To Kill From Day One – Leonor and Morris
13h/ No celebrations in the future for NATO. The lies and disinformation have been flowing fast and furious. NATO is trying to use the media to create the false illusion of an impending NATO victory. For those of us who know better, it’s extremely annoying to say the least.
12h/ Saif Al Islam Gaddafi Interview in Tripoli 23.08.2011 Rebel & Media Lies Exposed
10h/ Davey D interviews Don DeBar about the real on-the-ground situation in Tripoli. Prominent American Activist Shot By Sniper Fire in Tripoli, Internet Cut.
09h/ A Closer Look On Qatari Hollywood And The Mercenary Invasion of Tripoli
08h/ A order was given by so-called “journalists” to bring down Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya and Thierry Meyssan. The order was given to kill Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya and Thierry Meyssan!
07h/ Benghazi: Violent clashes and gunfire heard after the appearance of Saif Al Islam Gaddafi. Rebels go out on the streets saying “We want, we want Saif Al Islam and his father” and insulting the National Transitional Council ,calling them liars.
03h/ Saif Al Islam says that all the news was just propaganda and he asked the journalists to come follow him and see the city of Tripoli.

02h/  Saadi Qaddafi is in Tripoli accompanied with 1600 fighters from warfela tribe, 3000 from tarhuna Day 153: 21. august 2011. Libya news  [Battle for Tripoli]

00:25h/ NATO is bombing in places in Tripoli, heavy clashes in Tunisian borders, Rixos surrounded by tribes! 24h/ “Good news. The situation is now very calm in Tripoli after  intervention of  Libyan army with tribes. The NATO lad rebels  are very small groups which want to make trouble here and there and flee. But the western and arabic chanels exagerate to make people afraid. This is all the story.Be confident and optimist. All the children of Kadhafi are free and are now fighting. The Libyan television continues its broadcasting by only sound without images because of disturbance caused by stallites over Libya.”

22h/ An independent journalist sent us a memo: “Media are telling that the Libyan Government collapsed. NO. Saif al Islam was captured in Rixos, I’m in Rixos, and he was not here, so NO. The ICC tells that he is captured, but they’re lying! There is no one from ICC here…” 21h/ Forces loyal to Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi helped his son Mohammed flee house arrest on Monday, Al Jazeera television reported, as rebels sought to secure full control of the capital Tripoli. [COMEDIA DEL’ARTE IS countinue … He never be arrested]


20h/ Saif al islam live now on the Alray channel, God is great!

19h/ Missy Kel / I have received a message from Lizzie Phelan saying she has been blocked from her facebook and email. She said this is clearly to try and stop the truth from getting out about what is happening. She has also been informed by CNN journalists that she must stop saying in her Press TV etc updates that Al Qaeda is working with the rebelsbecause she will be accused of being a traitor.

18h/ Gunshots during RT live from Tripoli – Journalist Mahdi Nazemroaya, who is stationed in a central Tripoli hotel with the international press, says the journalists are being targeted by the rebels and the NATO forces that support them. While he is speaking to RT, shooting can be heard.

18h/ NATO not winning’: Gunfire heard during Tripoli live report .Rebels say they now control most of Tripoli, and have taken Libyan state TV off air. But some reports also suggest that opposition fighters have been looting private houses.

18h/ #Libya Breaking News: From my cousin he is personal guard 4 Saif Islam Gaddafi,all the Family of Gaddafi is fine,sons of Gaddafi is leading the battle,its not battle as the #media says no it’s only sum rats come from the east by #NATO helicopters,they put them in Tajura but Tajura is under control & Saif Islam was #speaking from Tajura 2 the #journalist.
18h/ Call to Tripoli in the heart of events moments ago. Green square is controlled by Libyan army. Media are fake. Fierce clashes in Gargalesh ( the hi society area of Tripoli ) where the residents proved traitors and raised the flag of shame.Libyan army and volunteers are cleaning the area. And in Tanjoura area clashes. but army has cntrol of the perimeter of the city.
Also Saif al Islam Al Gaddafi was in the port area earlier today in order to coordinate the defence from the rats that arriving with nato boats.
18h/ @rolandoteleSUR Journalists such as @lizziephelan received Death threats from CNN journalists for telling TRUTH Rebels in bed with Al-CiAda
17h/  Egypt, Jordan recognize the rebel National Transitional Council
17h/ Breaking news BBC: Our correspondent in the west of Tripoli says forces loyal to Col Gaddafi appear to have retaken ground that had been held by the rebels earlier in the day. The rebel unit he is travelling with has returned to the city but is several kilometres further from the centre than they were this morning  and CNN
17h/ Now online from honest eastern Libya confirms that the sons of the Arab tribes in Egypt and Benghazi honest Liberal will be crawling for Salloum and Benghazi
 TRIPOLI – 22 AUGUST 2011.

 What is called the “storm of Tripoli,” in fact, of course, a landing operation of French, British, and (probably) American special forces. One of the main goals – it is possible to say – were the leaders of Defense and the leaders of the legitimate authority. Once this is admitted even by prominent and very cautious representative of the administration of the Russian Federation, Mr. Kosachev, dispute this fact is impossible. After a serious panic in Tripoli, restored order with respect to the forces of brigade Khamis al-Qaddafi, and who came to his call volunteers, as citizens and residents of rural areas. In fact, the troops performed their mission: to perpetrate the capital of the maximum bloodshed and gave the picture. Now pockets of rebellion seems to be isolated. Rumors about the capture of Mohammed and Saif al-Islam al-Gaddafi, at least for the moment, should be considered fiction, neither one nor the other has not yet shown on TV, but about Muhammad at all became aware that an attempt to capture it (a group of Special Forces on a tip from correspondents Al Jazeera, who took him for an interview) had failed. In general, as it turned out, the roof of correspondents of “civilized” media (CNN about it is known exactly) based Western intelligence agents and aviakorrektirovschiki. The Colonel is alive and with Khamis collects militia. At dawn, he – in his helmet and with a gun – found on Green Square, where, as it turns out, the rebels did not exist. All the “civilized” journalists gave slightly reversed in the sense of fanfare. All of the leaders of “civilized” world, from Juppe and Obama to Rasmussen and Merkel are silent in a rag unanimously, without haste to declare victory, and if something out loud and express, the only requirement to the Colonel, “to leave his post.” Thats, there is no victory. Troopers s.hits and failed.
18h/ Libyan armed forces captain Hasan D
   Monday, 22.08.2011 – 16:53 | “There is a battle, and no taking of Tripoli did not exist. The situation has changed for the following reasons: First, last week, almost all combat sorties of enemy aircraft were directed exclusively against our weakened Tripoli group. We were forced to divert forces to Misratu, Breguet and to cover South.
   Secondly, the enemy came to the capital only because NATO ground operation started. Just last week we launched against large bands of foreign fighters from the so-called PMC (private military companies – Ed.), Which together with the rebels began to move under cover of air over land.
   And on August 21 the enemy launched a combined attack by sea, land and air. The first attempt was the approach the ship from Malta on the pretext of evacuating foreigners, whom they tried to land directly at the port of Tripoli landing, but we fired him, and he walked away. Two days in a row are large-scale bombing, which we have not seen. Disrupted electricity, telephone service works with large faults.
   And finally, the evening of August 21 helicopters landed troops of the enemy continuously SWAT NATO forces and foreign mercenaries. According to intelligence, in Tripoli entered raiding the British SAS, French GIGN and the Foreign Legion.
    A morning of August 22 several hundred boats landed under cover of “Apache” along the coast of Tripoli, a major assault of the enemy, who quickly began to move forward. Among them were the British and French mercenaries and kaidisty who mercilessly kill residents and raping women. Measures are taken to destroy them. Captured and killed at least a few members of attack, with British papers. “
17h/ Qataris Killed in Tripoli As City Brought Under Control. Qatari soldiers in front of my eyes, big beards, and on my hands right now I’m holding a Qatari passport… there are a lot of them but Tripoli is under control, it’s all secure, everything is fine.
16h/ Rafael Fernandes reports:
There are currently French and English troops on the Libyan coast about 20 km from Tripoli trying to enter the city with the excuse of saving the Libyan people of the “claws” of Libyan leader when the army entered the city to defend the population. These troops have now found that they can not defend the Libyan people because the army has not entered Libya in Tripoli.
When the Libyan government became aware of the situation handed over weapons to the population of Tripoli and told them to defend against the rebels who came by sea.

15h/State TV Libya until Tripoli ignores events. / 22.08.2011 14:20 /
Libyan state television channel “Al-Jamahiriya”, apparently, still in the hands of supporters of Muammar Gaddafi, is not paying any attention to events in the capital, reports “Interfax”.
According to her, at the present time, state television shows the transfer of Libyan cardiovascular diseases.
[ It was reported that the opponents of Gaddafi said on Monday that already control 95% of Tripoli.]
15h/ Olga Sokolova 22 August – In the city gangs entrenched at Marriott Hotel (now the building is burning ) in the west of Tripoli, and to create a panic tried to open fire on peaceful civilians. To do this, have been previously rented rooms with help of agenсies with a British passports under the guise of journalism and business (they wanted to repeat the situation that has already taken place in Benghazi).
thats how it as done…but with british passports!?!
14h/ I have been in Tripoli for approx one month, it is not until THIS moment that the rebels are in the city that I and all the other journalists have not felt safe. Lord only knows what the masses of people in Tripoli who heroically supported their government are going through. Thinking of the many friends I have made here who have become family, I hope they are safe,.also this is the first time I have not been able to move outside of a hotel. Before the streets were safe to go anywhere in the capital [Lizzie Phelan]
11h/ it is not looking good guys. I think the situation has changed, I know some areas of the capital are definitely under rebel control, how much it is impossible for me to say. Anyway I am awaiting evacuation with all the other foreign journalists..Britain, France and the United States have unleashed a nightmare in this region that will backfire extremely. [Lizzie Phelan]
09h/ I have now from RELIABLE sources that the Libyan army is still in control of Tripoli. Al J footage of Green Sq was FAKE. Gaddafi went to Green Sq with one of his sons. Things much calmer now. Really need to sleep for a couple of hours. More info soon
Looks like govt strategy was to draw all the rebels into Tripoli, and allow them in essentialy, because hitherto they have been operation in sleeper cells, unknown to the govt/army. this way they were brought out in the light of day. Big tribes inc Wafalla, Washafana, Tarhouna etc came to Tripoli to support the army. RIP all the martyrs.
14h/ “The Russian military-diplomatic source, who is now in the Libyan capital, also confirmed this information on Skype “” “Shops are closed, the streets of downtown police patrols and army units. But all was quiet, no shooting, “- he said. A source at the Embassy of Libya states that “staff who distribute the western television that the rebels in the heart of… celebrating a victory, shot in a special pavilion, which last month was built near the capital of Qatar, Doha.” “The pavilion was built almost exactly on the plan of Tripoli, but it can not account for all the destruction from the recent bombing of the city. And it shows, “- says an employee of the embassy.
13h/ Distribute the Western Television That the Rebels in the Heart of celebrating a victory, shot in a special pavilion, which last month was built near the capital of Qatar, Doha. ” “The pavilion was built almost exactly on the plan of Tripoli, but it can not account for all the destruction from the recent bombing of the city. And it shows,” – says an employee of the embassy
12h/ The English daily THE SUN is reproducing edited pictures of the march of a million held in Tripoli on the 1st of July in support of Gathfi as though they are “the people of Tripoli celebrating the Liberation of the city from Gathfi.” The photo-shop fix was easy. Just enlarge and add in the black and red colours on the green flags. Check it for yourself and be aware of the deception!.this is amaizing?!? HOW THEY CAN BE LIER SOO BIG LIER ?!? look photo look colors ? SIMPLY IT IS NOT TRUE]

10h/ lManuel Ernesto De Brabandere: Suggestion, we should stop calling them RATS,!!! A rat is a decent animal compared with this GENOCIDES AND THIEVES!!!

Let’s called that way GENOCIDES AND THIEVES it will be good for later on when they have to face an INTERNATIONAL PEOPLES COURT in a trial transmitted worldwide not like USA has avoid to do for more than 11 years to the innocent person that are in incarceration now violating all international rules.

Example Guantanamo, a military USA base illegally in the Republic of CUBA. We would like to read others opinions. I might be wrong. 09h/ Assassination Attempts Against Independent Journalists in Libya. Assassination attempts against independent truth media journalists operating in Libya, of which there are only 5 known to Mathaba, of which 3 have been targeted as soon as the NATO-led rebel advances on Tripoli  08h/ Truth journalist Mahdi Nazemroaya fired on at Tripoli hotel by NATO backed terrorists and snipers, threatened by CNN ‘journalist’ 07h/  21 agosto 2011 – El presidente de Venezuela, Hugo Chávez, denunció este domingo que el imperialismo de Estados Unidos y sus aliados de Europa están perpetrando “una masacre” en Libia con el fin último de hacerse de las riquezas petroleras de esa nación.

Day 153: 21. august 2011. Libya news

Midnight 21. August 2011.

August 20 Midnight – Tripoli Update – The Word on The Street

01h/ Ali Elsharif – Tamam Sir, the situation returned to control new in a number of areas where there have been confrontations and defeat the rats to the back, and the arrival of reinforcements thousands made up of all parts of the Libyan capital, Tripoli, and the return canals Libyan broadcasting after being bombed by NATO … 00h/ The Brother Leader  Gaddafi (Qadhafi, Kadhafi) with his uniform and kalashnikof – in Tripoli  [Al jamahiriya channel.]

23:30h/ Update on Tripoli from Lizzie Phelan, 21.08.11, NATO War On Libya & DR Moussa Ibrahim  All news till 22h are in this post — Battle for Libya: news 21. August 2011. Tripoli under  fire

** Tonight NATO carried out heavy bombings of several districts in Tripoli.100 people were killed, civilians among them As a result, about . Rescuers are still working, which is why the exact number of the dead and wounded is still unknown.

22h/ #Libya: Tribes deny NATO-led rebels claim that they support civil war; say they will protect sovereign of Libya and their tribes’ pride. 22h/ #Libya: UK directing NATO-led rebels to provide them sensitive information about Libya that could endanger national security. 22h/ #Libya: US and UK Special forces seen on ground in Tripoli. 22h/ PoshBirdGabi (@PoshBirdGabi) [ ] #ATTENTION #HUMANS: DO NOT BE FOOLED! YOU WERE WARNED AND NOW IT IS UNFOLDING. by PoshBirdGabi (@PoshBirdGabi) [ ] There were reliable reports from Qatar to the Libyan people about the NATO crusaders plans to deceive the world with a hollywood style portrayal of a “rebel” victory ( It also filtered to us here in Canada ( Earlier this week, former CIA asset at the United Nations Susan Landauer also told us that we would experience a Main Stream Media (MSM) blitzkrieg claiming NATO “rebel” victories across Libya ( We have seen the truth of these predictions with our own eyes as the New York Times pumps out pure propaganda that Stephen Lendman challenges ( Independent journalists are also taking note of this increase in pro-NATO pro-war media propaganda ( While this is happening, America tries to steal Libyan money at the United Nations. Their perfidity was challenged by South Africa ( Do NOT allow media lies to pull you into supporting another illegal, immoral, and simply vicious war based on nothing but lies (   22h/ Egypt – Libya’s civil war so far has involved some serious urban fighting in towns such as Misrata, but most battles have been relatively small skirmishes.If Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi retains the loyalty of large numbers of security forces in the capital, the ragtag opposition forces could struggle and there would be little NATO air strikes could do without risking civilians.

22h/Libya S.O.S. without  internet access all day Day 152: 20. august 2011. Libya news

23h/ Basic points of the conference of Dr. Mousa Ibrahim about the facts and the situation on the gound today ( 20-8-2011) 1.Tripoli is safe, some claimed that the rebels were in airport.The jounalists were taken to the airport in order to verify the security of the area. 2.Zliten is in firm control of the Libyan armed forces. some rebels tried to come from misrata ( dafniyah) direction but they died in the gates of Zliten. 3.Brega is secure and safe under the Libyan armed forces. 4.Some pockets of resistance are in some west cities,especialy in surman city, but they face poplar resistance and they are eventually defeated. 5.The armed gangs have not made any progress at all.On the contrary they are now facing defeat or suicide. 6.Libya always wanted a political solution to this crisis bt the other part rejected any African Union or international peace effort and proposal. 7.Dr Al Baghdadi al Mahmoudi called the Secretary gerneral of the united nations and suggested that Mr. Ban kim Moon and a high delegation of the AU to come in Tripoli and investigate the NATO crimes against the citizens and the violations of resolutions and also to make a combined effort to bring peace without any external agendas.  22h/ Sukant Chandan –In Libya NATO *literally* bomb a path with their jets and apache helicpoters for the pro-nato slaves/rebels to then advance, only then to run back when Libyan army start to get them. For eg, last night AJE etc saying pro-nato rebels took Brega, bt now they saying Gadaffi’s people has taken Brega back. 22H/ Since the beginning of the NATO operation (31 March 2011, 06.00GMT) a total of 19,646 sorties, including 7,423 strike sorties,have been conducted.  21h/ Libya / Tripoli: Inhuman NATO war crimes. Part 4 – Today. 19 August 2011 20h/ Rebels admitted losing the battle of Brega. This is only the beginning of the end of lies. The truth should always win because it is stronger. 20h/ Demonstration in Paris first week of september against Bombarding in Libya and against nato war crime. 19h/In addition to exposing the rapacity of the United States, this incredible episode demonstrates that the self-proclaimed “Free Libya” of Misrata and

 Benghazi is not governed by the National Transitional Council (CNT), which is nothing but a facade, and a seriously cracked one at that. Eastern Libya is controlled by NATO and administered by the Libyan Information Exchange Mechanism (LIEM), an informal entity with no legal personality, which was established in Naples by the United States alone, although some of its employees are Italians

18h/ NATO warplanes are bombing Tripoli, as Western-backed forces affiliated to the Transitional National Council (TNC) continue to launch ground offensives with NATO air support to encircle the Libyan capital. The US press increasingly claims that the TNC will soon defeat the Libyan government of Colonel Muammar Gaddafi, against whom NATO has waged war, using the TNC as its ground forces, since March. The collaboration between far-right Islamist groups and the NATO countries further exposes the cynicism of the “war on terror” waged by the US and the European powers. While citing Al Qaeda as an absolute evil that justifies war and deep attacks on democratic rights, they can collaborate with similar forces when it suits their imperialist interests.
17h/ #Libya: An estimated more than 55,000 people have been killed since NATO started bombing Libya.[ cdoebbler curtis doebbler]
16h/ NATO targets civilians traveling from Tunisia to Libya in blatant violation of international humanitarian and human rights law.
**  AL QAEDA of Maghreb confirms that one of their heads was killed in the clashes that took place between zawiyah-sabartha.
16h/ BY Trajan ” A) A small group of rebels entered the refinery of Zawia but they have been chased away.
B) A small attack of about 8 cars tried a desperate attack from the southern areas of Zlitan in an attempt to force government forces to come out of Misrata to confront them but they were defeated and pushed away by the Tribes of Zlitan, with the volunteers from all over Libya
C) Rebels supply routes in the west have been cut so they can’t progress anywhere
D) The only major presence of rebels in the west is still Sorman with area controlled by rebels but in Sabratha there are pockets of them in some areas
E) There is fighting in Al Harsha west of Misrata and in Dafnia
F) There was intensified bombing on “military targets”– residential areas– in Tripoli. 27 dead-– witnesses say they bombed a mosque, homes, a medical warehouse, a heart clinic (used to treat wounded). The bombing does not have a military purpose, but phycological. NATO is using sonic-booms to frighten the women and children. they fly over a location and enter sonic speeds mimicking the sounds of bombs. Zlitan: rebels are trying to draw the army away from Misrata (this translation by Yelbihs,.)”[Thanks to Trajan K.]
14h/ Yesterday Nato aircraft invaded the airspace of Tripoli and more than 100 bombs Launched on the city. Even dropped bombs on the streets Trying to terrorize the Population of Tripoli.
13h/ PoshBirdGabi-Why was it relevant for him to point out that the soldiers were ALL BLACK??? Not(@YouTube
Note the very happy brit reporter! no question here if her doubting what shes being told. Did NATO Kill off Libyan Soldiers that were fleeing on a Boat? (August 18, 2011)
12h/ Berlin under fire over “secret” participation in NATO’s Libya mission. Berlin’s official position is that no German troops are being deployed in Libya. But Bundeswehr soldiers are indirectly taking part in the conflict by providing target assessment for their NATO allies.,,15331653,00.html
12h/ With the Libyan rebel movement insisting once again that they are on the cusp of “victory” in the seemingly endless civil war, US officials are warning that the regime is preparing for a “last stand” in the capital city of Tripoli.
Day 152: 20. august 2011. Libya news
23h/ Basic points of the conference of Dr. Mousa Ibrahim about the facts and the situation on the gound today ( 20-8-2011) 1.Tripoli is safe, some claimed that the rebels were in airport.The jounalists were taken to the airport in order to verify the security of the area. 2.Zliten is in firm control of the Libyan armed forces. some rebels tried to come from misrata ( dafniyah) direction but they died in the gates of Zliten. 3.Brega is secure and safe under the Libyan armed forces. 4.Some pockets of resistance are in some west cities,especialy in surman city, but they face poplar resistance and they are eventually defeated. 5.The armed gangs have not made any progress at all.On the contrary they are now facing defeat or suicide. 6.Libya always wanted a political solution to this crisis bt the other part rejected any African Union or international peace effort and proposal. 7.Dr Al Baghdadi al Mahmoudi called the Secretary gerneral of the united nations and suggested that Mr. Ban kim Moon and a high delegation of the AU to come in Tripoli and investigate the NATO crimes against the citizens and the violations of resolutions and also to make a combined effort to bring peace without any external agendas.  22h/ Sukant Chandan –In Libya NATO *literally* bomb a path with their jets and apache helicpoters for the pro-nato slaves/rebels to then advance, only then to run back when Libyan army start to get them. For eg, last night AJE etc saying pro-nato rebels took Brega, bt now they saying Gadaffi’s people has taken Brega back. 22H/ Since the beginning of the NATO operation (31 March 2011, 06.00GMT) a total of 19,646 sorties, including 7,423 strike sorties,have been conducted.  21h/ Libya / Tripoli: Inhuman NATO war crimes. Part 4 – Today. 19 August 2011 20h/ Rebels admitted losing the battle of Brega. This is only the beginning of the end of lies. The truth should always win because it is stronger. 20h/ Demonstration in Paris first week of september against Bombarding in Libya and against nato war crime. 19h/In addition to exposing the rapacity of the United States, this incredible episode demonstrates that the self-proclaimed “Free Libya” of Misrata and
 Benghazi is not governed by the National Transitional Council (CNT), which is nothing but a facade, and a seriously cracked one at that. Eastern Libya is controlled by NATO and administered by the Libyan Information Exchange Mechanism (LIEM), an informal entity with no legal personality, which was established in Naples by the United States alone, although some of its employees are Italians
18h/ NATO warplanes are bombing Tripoli, as Western-backed forces affiliated to the Transitional National Council (TNC) continue to launch ground offensives with NATO air support to encircle the Libyan capital. The US press increasingly claims that the TNC will soon defeat the Libyan government of Colonel Muammar Gaddafi, against whom NATO has waged war, using the TNC as its ground forces, since March. The collaboration between far-right Islamist groups and the NATO countries further exposes the cynicism of the “war on terror” waged by the US and the European powers. While citing Al Qaeda as an absolute evil that justifies war and deep attacks on democratic rights, they can collaborate with similar forces when it suits their imperialist interests.
17h/ #Libya: An estimated more than 55,000 people have been killed since NATO started bombing Libya.[ cdoebbler curtis doebbler]
16h/ NATO targets civilians traveling from Tunisia to Libya in blatant violation of international humanitarian and human rights law.
**  AL QAEDA of Maghreb confirms that one of their heads was killed in the clashes that took place between zawiyah-sabartha.
16h/ BY Trajan ” A) A small group of rebels entered the refinery of Zawia but they have been chased away.
B) A small attack of about 8 cars tried a desperate attack from the southern areas of Zlitan in an attempt to force government forces to come out of Misrata to confront them but they were defeated and pushed away by the Tribes of Zlitan, with the volunteers from all over Libya
C) Rebels supply routes in the west have been cut so they can’t progress anywhere
D) The only major presence of rebels in the west is still Sorman with area controlled by rebels but in Sabratha there are pockets of them in some areas
E) There is fighting in Al Harsha west of Misrata and in Dafnia
F) There was intensified bombing on “military targets”– residential areas– in Tripoli. 27 dead-– witnesses say they bombed a mosque, homes, a medical warehouse, a heart clinic (used to treat wounded). The bombing does not have a military purpose, but phycological. NATO is using sonic-booms to frighten the women and children. they fly over a location and enter sonic speeds mimicking the sounds of bombs. Zlitan: rebels are trying to draw the army away from Misrata (this translation by Yelbihs,.)”[Thanks to Trajan K.]
14h/ Yesterday Nato aircraft invaded the airspace of Tripoli and more than 100 bombs Launched on the city. Even dropped bombs on the streets Trying to terrorize the Population of Tripoli.
13h/ PoshBirdGabi-Why was it relevant for him to point out that the soldiers were ALL BLACK??? Not(@YouTube
Note the very happy brit reporter! no question here if her doubting what shes being told. Did NATO Kill off Libyan Soldiers that were fleeing on a Boat? (August 18, 2011)
12h/ Berlin under fire over “secret” participation in NATO’s Libya mission. Berlin’s official position is that no German troops are being deployed in Libya. But Bundeswehr soldiers are indirectly taking part in the conflict by providing target assessment for their NATO allies.,,15331653,00.html
12h/ With the Libyan rebel movement insisting once again that they are on the cusp of “victory” in the seemingly endless civil war, US officials are warning that the regime is preparing for a “last stand” in the capital city of Tripoli.
Libya news [backup libyasos] 10. august- 17. august 2011. ->
Libya news [backup libyasos] 29. july – 09. august 2011. ->
Libya news [backup libyasos] 11. july – 28. july 2011. ->
Libya news [backup libyasos] 06. july – 11. july 2011. ->
Libya news [backup libyasos] 03. july – 05. july 2011. ->
Libya news [backup libyasos] 01. july – 2. july 2011. ->
Libya news [backup libyasos] 25 jun – 30 jun 2011. ->
Libya news [backup libyasos] 04 jun – 24 jun 2011.->

NATO paves the way for Civil War and Foreign Occupation as Western Oil Giants pounce on Libya

Posted: 2011/08/23 From: Mathaba
The finishing touches are being added to the myth of the Libya war.

by Martin Iqbal

A barrage of propaganda is convincing the world that the war is almost over. Amid the chaos Western oil giants pounce, foreshadowing a protracted and bloody civil war, and a foreign occupation in the guise of a ‘peacekeeping’ force.Conventional wisdom has it that events in Libya are the result of an indigenous uprising that has organically risen from the soils of Libya. We are meant to believe that the ‘rebels’ are an independent force finally seeking freedom from a 42-year dictatorship under Muammar Gaddafi. From the outset, this is the narrative that has been pushed by a concerted global corporate media campaign, and it is a completely false one. This myth has allowed NATO to bombard Libyan infrastructure, soldiers, and civilian volunteers who have taken up arms to defend themselves from foreign invasion. In the last few days, this myth has culminated in a brazen psychological warfare operation mounted in tandem with a NATO attack on Tripoli, aimed at crushing the Libyan Resistance once and for all.

Demolishing the ‘revolution’ myth

From the very beginning, the Pakistan Observer reported that on the night of February 22/23, British, American, and French military personnel were landed in Benghazi and Tobruk via boat from NATO warships anchored off the Libyan coast. The Indian Navy also sent its largest warship – the INS Jalashwa (formerly the USS Trenton – delivered to India by the U.S. four years previously). These troops set up military bases in Libya from which they could train and direct the disorganised, untrained ‘rebel’ forces. From early March, reports of British troops on the ground in Libyasaturated the press. The British government refused to comment on its special forces presence in Libya, but admitted to the presence of a military advisory team. Amid the British, French, American, and Israeli military and intelligence personnel directing the ‘rebels’, a Libyan CIA asset returned to Libya to take a commanding post. In mid March, Khalifa Haftar returned to Libya from his comfortable home in Vienna, Virginia – where he had lived for 20 years – 5 miles from Langley, CIA Headquarters.

NATO’s cowardly and bloody air war

What followed was a cowardly military campaign wherein NATO jets and drones destroyed Libyan air defences, and simply levelled anything in the rebels’ path. Weeks after the onset of the NATO bombing in mid March and after negligible military progress, British and French attack helicopters entered the fray, further tipping the balance in favour of the ‘rebels’. Libyan Army soldiers, many who were teenage conscripts, as well as civilian volunteers, were torn to shreds as Apache helicopters and jets attacked ‘Gaddafi troop concentrations’. After 5 months of intense NATO aerial bombardment, the ‘rebels’ were still unable to achieve any lasting strategic victories. More importantly the Libyan people, especially in Tripoli, had become galvanised and staunch in their unity against NATO, against the rebels, and in solidarity with Col. Gaddafi.

Operation Mermaid Dawn: Smoke, Mirrors, and Blood

Knowing that the ‘rebels’ had no chance whatsoever against the popular will of Libya, NATO resorted to the only tactic that could work: psychological warfare partnered with a cowardly blitzkrieg of Tripoli, accommodating a ground advance into the capital. On Saturday 20 August at 20:00 – just after the Iftar, the breaking of the Ramadan fast – NATO’s Operation Mermaid Dawn went into action. The Mosque loudspeakers of Tripoli were used to signal dormant ‘sleeper cells’ of rebels. In several small groups, these armed rebels carried out multiple attacks. The fighting overnight left 350 dead, over 3,000 wounded, and was intended to cause panic amongst the Libyan Resistance. Thierry Meyssan reports that fighting subsided during the day of Sunday 21 August, until phase II of NATO’s final push began. A NATO ship docked at Tripoli, and unloaded heavy weaponry as well as Qatari troops and rebel forces. NATO’s cowardly modus operandi continued as Apache helicopters strafed Libyans in the streets in order to clear the way for the rebels. Bombing was stepped up on Tripoli in order to terrorise the Libyan resistance and increase the likelihood of rebel success. Over 1,300 were killed within a 10 hour period on Sunday night. Independent journalists Mahdi Nazemroaya and Don DeBar, citing sources in Tripoli, both report the presence of Qatari troops, several of whom has been killed in the fighting. Nazemroaya also reports CNN journalists threatening independent journalists, warning that they would be killed if they mentioned the rebels’ al Qaeda links. Further, Thierry Meyssan reports the presence of CIA & MI6 spies in the Tripoli Rixos hotel, who are masquerading as journalists. The corporate-Zionist media dutifully played its role in the psychological warfare operation, ensuring the world was oblivious to the reality on the ground. Across the spectrum, reports flowed in of people ‘flooding the streets’ and celebrating as the rebels rolled in to Tripoli meeting little resistance. The truth of the matter was that Tripoli was suffering a lethal and intense NATO bombardment with hundreds upon hundreds being killed in a matter of hours. In tandem with this, Qatari troops and rebel forces advanced under the shadows of NATO bombs and bullets – the whole operation coordinated by Western intelligence. As part of the psychological warfare operation, even the ICC got involved in telling absolute lies. The ICC confirmed that Saif al-Islam Gaddafi had been captured, and this in fact turned out to be a complete fabrication intended to cow the Libyan Resistance into submission. Matthew Chance, a senior CNN correspondent subsequently had a face-to-face meeting with Saif al-Islam, and even took a photo. In the following RT report you will see Saif al-Islam Gaddafi parading the streets of Tripoli. Furthermore, Lizzie Phelan’s report puts paid to the thrust of NATO’s psychological warfare – the lies that the Resistance is ‘crumbling’, and rebels are in control of most of Tripoli: And now, in what is perhaps one of the central objectives of the psychological warfare being waged in the media, Western oil giants have begun to pounce. The global corporate media tells the world that the war in Libya is as good as over. In reality, Libya is now entering a period of protracted civil war as the Libyan Resistance refuses to submit to the foreign invaders and their proxies. A violent foreign occupation,already predicted for October 2011, also seems imminent, and has already been called for by the President of the Council on Foreign Relations. Amid the chaos and confusion, Libya’s most precious national asset is already being stolen and divvied up, and you can expect its gold to follow.



24 WednesdayAug 2011

THE CRYS FOR NATO OCCUPATION ARE DEAFENING! Tony Cartalucci It was reported that Richard Haas, president of the Fortune 500-lined Council on Foreign Relations, had stated clearly that “Libya  now needs boots on the ground,” NATO boots to be specific. Now joining the growing chorus of globalists calling for a full NATO occupation of Libya is Neo-Con degenerate, fellow Council on Foreign Relations conspirator Max Boot who recently wrote an editorial for the LA Times titled, “Libya’s problems are far from over,” where he emphatically states “peacekeeping troops” are an absolute necessity to head off what the media is already trying to brand an “insurgency” referring to the Libyan government’s defense of Tripoli. To compound Boot’s apparent contempt for his readership’s intelligence, he claims that occupation forces will be needed to secure Libya’s “weapons of mass destruction,” and give the Libyan rebels time to build up professional security forces – rebels who are admitted members of Al Qaeda, many of whom are fresh back from murdering American troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. Boot’s only regret regarding the disastrous and still failing US occupation of Iraq was that more troops were not committed, seemingly suggesting Libya will be “done right” and a massive force will be landed to ensure the nation progresses as Wall Street and London desire. Boot’s final insult to our intelligence is the claim that NATO currently appears to be refusing to commit to any such occupation force. In reality, NATO’s denials of such an occupation force are for perception-management purposes only. NATO troops are already on the ground, including SAS special forces, Qatari funded British mercenaries, Qatari and Emarati troops, and MI6 and CIA operatives. The UK has already admitted to having prepared at least 200 more troops to land in Libya at any given moment and arrangements are already underway to tap NATO members for additional troop commitments. The only complication for Boot and his degenerate co-conspirator Haas’ narrative is that Tripoli has not yet fallen. The rebels, even with NATO ground forces assisting them, are approaching now a full week of fighting to take the capital in operations that promised to be over “in hours not days.” The mainstream media has been perpetually assuring its dimwitted viewership that Tripoli is “virtually,” “almost,” “about to be,” “on the brink of,” “any moment,” falling into rebel hands. As rebels rush from one hallow photo opportunity to the other in an attempt to sell their “victory” to the world, the Libyan military forces have been hitting them from the southern situated Rixos Hotel, to the international airport in the far east of Tripoli. Quite clearly the capital is still contested, while other cities across Libya still remain firmly in government hands. While Boot, Haas, and the degenerate bankster-serving media propagandists assume the public has bought the narrative that Libya is now a “NATO victory” and the occupation force will merely be a prudent conclusion to their operations to “ensure stability,” the reality is that Qaddafi and the Libyan army cannot be defeated by the rebel forces alone. By rushing the rebels’ contrived government from Benghazi to Tripoli, declaring them the victors in the capital amidst a historically unprecedented disinformation campaign, and now beginning to portray the Libyan army as “insurgents,” they are in fact setting the stage for a ground invasion – not occupation – to deal the Libyan military a death blow. It is now confirmed that the ground operations against Tripoli that started last weekend were overwhelmingly a psychological operation attempting to belie NATO’s weakness. Outrageous propaganda and staged chaos following an unprecedented aerial bombardment by NATO was designed to panic and collapse entirely Tripoli’s defenses and utterly rout Libyan troops. Instead, troops weathered the chaos and as it ebbed, counterattacked with Qaddafi’s son, Saif al-Islam leading the way. Saif had been “confirmed captured” by the Wall Street-London “International Criminal Court.” This is now exposed as obvious disinformation and the epitome of the sort of lies and propaganda employed by NATO in their desperate last-ditch bid to take Libya. It should be noted, that Max Boot was one of the many Neo-Con warmonger, corporate fascist globalist stooges that signed a June 2011 letter addressed to US House Republicans imploring them to ignore both the will of the American people and the contrived UN mandate in order to lend the rebels “more assistance.” Fellow signatories including William Kristol have been promoting a ground invasion and the forceful removal of Qaddafi from power since the beginning of NATO operations, making an open mockery of the very “international laws” Kristol and others presume the US should be enforcing upon the world. In war, when one relies on disinformation on the scale seen now used by NATO in Libya, it betrays their image of strength and the vitality of their campaign. If NATO and the rebels were truly as powerful and as capable as we are being told, there would be absolutely no need to obfuscate the facts on the ground in Libya to the extent that it is. Indeed, NATO’s latest attack on Tripoli was an absolute bluff which has been called by the Libyan people now in full resistance. The continued lies being peddled now by the media indicate a smokescreen being set up to give the rebel “government” enough time to squat in Tripoli and call in NATO troops. The very fact that Libya’s rebels are still meeting in Paris and Doha to complete their “transition” instead of in Tripoli exposes how ignominiously deceptive news of their “victory” is. Qaddafi has vowed to fight on for years – and seeing how he has been the only one telling the truth from the beginning, be it the fact that the rebels are Al Qaeda terrorists or that the rebels were paving the way for an inevitable Western occupation – we would be wise to believe him rather than the infinitely duplicitous Western media – who promised us “no boots on the ground” for an operation that was promised to end months ago.

Order: Kill non-mainstream reporters in Libya, What U.S. is hiding

Deborah Dupre's photo

, Human Rights Examiner

August 22, 2011 – Like this? Subscribe to get instant updates.
Copyright Deborah Dupré 2011. All rights reserved. Targeted Killings of non-mainstream reporters in Libya ordered: Attempts to bury truth The Examiner learned in communications from human rights defenders and independent journalists throughout Monday that they were shaken with news of 1300 Libyans killed and 5000 wounded Saturday, plus, the U.S. allegedly ordered Targeted Killings of Voltaire Network reporters, Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya and Thierry Meyssan, non-mainstream reporters in Libya covering the NATO war, while other independent reporters there are being fired upon and one, Mohammed Nabbous was killed Saturday according to ABC News.  In an interview with journalist Don DeBar on KPFA radio, he reported most mainstream “news” about Libya has been untrue, as alternative news sites heavily report but are increasingly persecuted according to their recent reports.


The reporter who may have known too much, slain and what the U.S. is hiding “The conflict in Libya has claimed the life of another journalist. A sniper shot Mohammed Nabbous, 28-year old resident of Benghazi and founder of its first independent TV news channel Libya Alhurra, on Saturday night,” reported ABC’sMark Colvin on Monday. As Naboous was filming attacks in Benghazi, he was shot, soon after the regime said it was honouring a ceasefire, according to ABC. “You may have heard Mohammed Nabbous on this program on Friday when he reported an attack on a power station outside Benghazi,” Colvin wrote. Within days of NATO bombings on Libya, Nabbous reportedly had a team of “citizen reporters,” shooting video reports all around Benghazi that he was posting on his channel Libya Alhurra. “He was also an important source for foreign networks like Al Jazeera, CNN and NPR who regularly interviewed him and rebroadcast his videos. We also relied on his video updates to confirm stories coming out of Benghazi,” stated Colvin forABC. The sense of despair expressed by Human Rights advocates and independent journalists from various points around the globe in communications to the Examiner on Monday as word spread about the recent NATO massacres on Libyans, unreported by mainstream news, and the targeting of independent reporters. Monday, cheers reported in some corners were not heard from human rights workers when mainstream reported Tripoli had falling under what independent reporters say, has been falsely reported on mainstream news. “What is needed right now is not despair on our part, but the dissemination of information, which NATO has decided is the most important battleground,” stated independent journalist, WBAIX  radio announcer Don DeBar, formerly withNPR’s WBAI. DeBar told Dupré in communications early Tuesday that Nabbous, unlike painted by ABC, was  “clearly a U.S. agent.” “He founded Libya’s version of al-Hurra,” said DeBar. According to Wikipedia “Alhurra (or al-Hurra) (Arabic: الحرّة‎, al-Ḥurrah [alˈħurra],[note] ‘The free’) is a United States-based satellite TV channel, sponsored by the U.S. government…” “The station is forbidden from broadcasting itself within the U.S. under the 1948 Smith-Mundt Act concerning the broadcast of propaganda.” ( and DeBar elaborated on U.S. media propaganda wheninterviewed by Press TV on Monday, showing documented photographic samples:

“Now the Russians, who conduct satellite surveillance of planet Earth, because they have been prepared for 50 years for a nuclear strike from the United States, said that, on the specific dates that [Gadaffi] charges were delineated that [he] had attacked his people from the air, here are the photographs: there are no planes in the air, there were no aeral activities conducted whatsoever. (Watch: ‘US liable for civilian deaths in Libya’, Press TV, August 22, 2011)

“This has not made the media in the west at all – including on programs like Democracy Now! and Al Jazeera which is carried on progressive radio networks, if you can believe that, in the United States,” he told Press TV. DeBar wrote Tuesday, “Coverage of the situation in Libya over the past three days, while useless to anyone trying to understand what is actually happening in Libya, nevertheless provides an interesting peek into the modus operandi of the global media that has broad application for the decoding of its coverage of all of the issues that touch our lives.” (See:“Media Wars – Many Mouths, One Voice: Libya Coverage Provides a Peek Behind the Curtain,” Don DeBar, August 23, 2011) Targeted Individual reporters for Targeted Killings The Réseau Voltaire, (Voltaire Network), an international non-profit organisation independent news group, based in Parisreleased a brief statement late on Monday about its two journalists in Libya targeted for killings. (Also see: “Obama targeted killings lawsuit spotlights American civilians,” Dupré, D. Examiner, September 2, 2010) “From the Rixos [Hotel], the order was given by so-called “journalists” from the U.S. to bring down Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya and Thierry Meyssan.” The statement was released in an short newsletter by Voltaire news group saying that the individuals who gave the orders “have been identified and their names will be released in due course.” Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya is a Research Associate with the Centre for Research on Globalization, and Thierry Meyssan, is president and founder of Voltaire Network and the Axis for Peace Conference. Both Nazemroaya and Meyssan are entrenched in Hotel Rixos, the Voltaire news group reported in a written statement. The targeted killing threats of the independent journalists highlight President Obama’s signed Executive Order that the Center for Constitutional Rights defined as “an extrajudicial killing policy under which names are added to CIA and military ‘kill lists’ through a secret executive process and stay there for months at a time. This policy ‘is plainly not limited to imminent threats” the Center for Constitutional Rights had said in September 2010.

“After the attacks of September 11, the Pentagon began a shift away from its late Cold War–era ‘two-war strategy,’ premised on maintaining the ability to conduct two major military operations simultaneously, and began to focus instead on irregular warfare against individuals and groups.” (Emphasis added; Sharon Weinberger, Black Ops: Secret Military Technology in the Age of Terrorism, August 3, 2010)

Weinberger furthers, “The head of U.S. Special Operations Command talks about ‘high-tech manhunting,’ while Air Force officials describe plans to compress the ‘kill chain.'” (Dupré, September 2, 2010)

An interview conducted early Monday morning with Voltaire’s Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya showed him in hiding, and trapped in Tripoli. (See embedded Youtube.) “I’m confined in a place where I can’t move,” cleary unnerved and appearing to be in a very small space as he spoke, Nazemroaya said. He described, partially in graphic details, some of the traumatizing events he has seen including massacres by NATO and the children. “There have been massive, — atrocious, — criminal bombings” against the Libyan people he emphatically reported. “I didn’t sleep the other night because the bombings would not stop.” He asked how mainstream reporters can be reporting on what is happening out on the streets when they are in the hotel with him. The Réseau, (Voltaire Network), according to Wkipedia:

“… systematically attacked the Bush and Sharon administrations. According to the Réseau, the United States are a “hyperpower”, a term forged by former minister Hubert Védrine, and all international relations are strongly dependent on the attitude of the concerned nations toward the USA. Thus, any analysis quickly comes back to the USA which they accuse of trying to establish a “new world order”, which was the exact formulation that George H.W. Bush used on September 11, 1990 in front of Congress on the 49th anniversary of the Pentagon´s groundbreaking.

In an email, WBAIX radio’s Don DeBar, who has remained in regular communications with several independent reporters in Libya, covered Libya there on the ground in 2009, and then, the covered the war on Libyans since its onset, concurred with Nazemroaya about mainstream journalists there. “Most reporting is being done from inside or near the journalists’ hotels,” DeBar stated. “Outside the primary location, snipers have fired at – and in one case, shot – non-mainstream journalists.” According to DeBar, only reporters “embedded with the invaders” have been permitted to shoot footage outdoors. Libya’s media has had its power cut off, so is off the air he said. In his August 23 report, DeBar wrote:

“The manufacture of events in Libya has been underway since the lead-up to the US-led invasion, including the narrative that enabled the UN resolutions 1970 and 1973 – prominent among these were the claim that the Libyan government was conducting an aerial war against protestors, countered by satellite evidence from the Russian military showing no such attacks took place, and the claim that African mercenaries were firing on protestors, which was both untrue and provoked racist killings of Libyans with African features and skin by rebel gangs.”
On Press TV, DeBar stated about NATO’s war on Libyans, “This is the second stop for AFRICOM [Africa Command], the first direct stop for AFRICOM under Obama’s regime.
“AFRICOM came online about two months before he was elected but after Cote D’Ivoire – where they carried the elected president out of the country at gunpoint, the French did, the former colonial power – this episode began.
“And Libya has played – if you want to believe Nelson Mandela – Libya played a major role in ending apartheid in South Africa, and Muammar Gaddafi in particular played a major role in doing that. He has been active in building a communications infrastructure and a financial infrastructure owned by Africa in Africa.”
Peddling Libya War as popular uprising when Libya had human rights obsrerved, unlike Americans having rights violated
Press TV asked DeBar, “If the Gaddafi regime has totally fallen, or will fall, how likely is it that the Libyan people will actually go further towards independence and be freer people as a lot of them who have been in the streets, and they have been showing some of them today, are saying? What’s the likely scenario in your perspective?
DeBar answered, “The likely scenario is colonialism, and the reason for the invasion of Libya is that Libya was one of the places organizing against colonialism of the continent of Africa.”

Early Monday morning, when KPFA’s Davey D interviewed DeBar about the real on-the-ground situation in Tripoli, DeBar said the war on Libya was peddled as a popular uprising, but Libyans, unlike Americans, have no reason to rebel against their government. (See: Don DeBar, “LIBYA: The Real Deal” Youtube.) “Unlike Americans,” he said, “everyone in Libya owns their own home, a human right — as well as free education, free health care comparable to the U.S. hospitals, affordable and widely available food – unlike Americans have,” he said. DeBar said on Press TV:

“The people of Libya, by the way, went from being the poorest people on the planet in 1969, by every objective measure, to having the highest standard of living in Africa, and one of the highest standards of living in the Muslim world – housing is owned by the people, free of any mortgages, everyone. It is a human right there under the law – and the entire education system and free healthcare.” (Press TV Transcript)

In Tripoli, “relentless NATO bombings resumed around 10:20 Monday morning against certain objectives that independent reporters say is a massacre,” according to Voltaire. The fighting also resumed around the Rixos Hotel where some Libyan leaders along with the foreign journalists are entrenched. DeBar said he has been told by some journalists stuck in the hotel, who have been able to call around the city to the many residents they know personally:

 “The invaders have been largely turned back. They arrived under severe aerial attacks across the city, including strafing of civilians intended to clear the streets for the invasion. “They were supplemented with troop landings from NATO naval vessels in the port. This was apparently the source of many of the Qatari personnel.”

Three states have offered diplomatic protection to the Voltaire Network team of reporters in Libya the news group stated.
“However, trapped in the city, they have no way of reaching the respective embassies.”
Turn of media events late Monday evening
On Monday, DeBar urged people to visit his Facebook page,!/don.debar where he keeps a long string of information needing to be shared, “especially those in, or in contact with people in, Libya,” he stated late Monday.
In a dramatic turn of events late Monday night, The Washington Post published an article about the reporting contradictions.
“Forces loyal to the fugitive Libyan leader Moammar Gaddafi struck back Monday against the rebel fighters who had swept euphorically into the capital the night before, forcing them to retreat from several strategic locations and tempering hopes that the battle for Tripoli was all but over.”
“The dramatic appearance Monday night of Gaddafi’s son Saif al-Islam at the Rixos hotel, where the Tripoli-based press corps remains trapped, contradicted the rebels’ assertion the day before that they had captured him and cast into doubt their claim of controlling 80 percent of the capital.”
DeBar told Dupré in a private email that his Press TV interview was recorded at 2:30 pm New York time on Monday, Auguest 22, 2011.
“At that time, I questioned the veracity of the claimed capture of Gadaffi’s sons and of rebel control of the city of Tripoli. It turns out I was right.”
“No, I don’t have a crystal ball – just good contacts on the ground who don’t lie or hold their tongues when they see horrible wrong being done. NATO – that’s Obama to the apologists – has done everything to keep this information from you, but the truth will out!”
Copyright Deborah Dupré 2011. All rights reserved.
You may share using our article tools on this page. 
Please do not copy articles from and redistribute by email or post to the web.
Please respect copyright policy that allows you to share link of the title and first paragraph.
Email the author:
Terror in Tripoli not what it seems say independent journalistsTerror in Tripoli not what it seems say independent journalists

Voltaire Network/ Thierry Meyssan

Video: Mahdi Nazemroaya from Tripoli early 22 August

Related Topics

Continue reading on Order: Kill non-mainstream reporters in Libya, What U.S. is hiding – National Human Rights |



*No mention that Gaddafi has held no official position since 1977 and does not rule Libya.
*No mention of the majority’s support for the official Libyan government or the overwhelming evidence that the Libyan people love Muammar Gaddafi and honor him as the Leader of the Real Revolution.
*No mention that before UNSC Res 1973, the UN praised Libya for its human rights record or Libya’s impressive human development indicators.
*No mention of who these “protesters” are.
*No mention that UNSC Res 1973 violates International law.
*No mention of al-qaeda or the true history of the crisis.
*No mention of the media lies that resulted in UNSC Res. 1973 or the fact that Russian satelite images contradicted media claims that Gaddafi was bombing his own people.
*No mention of the fact that the UN had not substantiated insurgent claims through a fact-finding mission prior to approving NATO intervention.
*No mention of numerous independent fact-finding mission reports that contradicted mainstream media and NATO narratives.
*No mention that the official Libyan government representatives were barred from these critical UN meetings and were forbidden to speak or present evidence on their own behalf.
*No mention that the official Libyan government’s numerous requests for fact-finding missions were turned down.
*No mention that the official Libyan government’s repeated attempts at peace negotiations were overturned by the UN and ignored by “the rebels” and NATO.
*No mention that the official Libyan government were in the process of holding peace negotiations mediated by the African Union when NATO bombardments began.
*No mention that the official Libyan government’s repeated requests for ceasefires were ignored by the insurgents and NATO.
*No mention that this was an armed insurrection and never a “peaceful protest”.
*No mention of the lynching and ethnic cleansing of black Africans by the “rebels”.
*No mention of the numerous atrocities commited by these insurgents: lootings, beheadings, torture, rape, human trafficking and war profiteering,to name a few.

Who is behind this propaganda?

It did not come from the journalists stranded in Tripoli. They were detained in the Corinthia hotel, threatened with death if they dared to counter NATO propaganda. Further, had Tripoli fallen, not one journalist who had reported contrary to NATO’s psy-ops would have made it out alive.

Yes, NATO has created a horrific nightmare. There are bodies everywhere. The full death toll is unknown. But there are also many possible narratives that can explain these bodies besides the “NATO is victorious” spin mainstream media are spewing out.

Which casualties were “rebel” and which were civilian? I am hearing numerous reports of high casualties among the “rebels”, many from Qatar and the UAE.

What is clear is that the Tripoli civilians have been (and still are) putting up a fierce fight. They had stated that they would rather die that live under a colonial yoke. They knew the stakes were high. Uncolonized minds cannot accept infringements upon their freedom and dignity.

It is therefore not logical to conclude that Libya is firmly under the control of NATO forces when the only reports are coming from the hostiles themselves and their conspiratorial, blood-thirsty press.

Consider these latest tweets from Tony Cartalucci:

@LandDestroyerWTony Cartalucci
Benghazi rebel leader claims ““Even after the fighting ends we still need logistical and military support from NATO,” #Libya #Feb17 TRAITORS

@LandDestroyerWTony Cartalucci
desperate #Feb17 Al Qaeda rebels begging NATO for continued aerial bombardments INCLUDING #Tripoli #Libya

@LandDestroyerWTony Cartalucci
NATO’s new plan to break the people of #Libya STARVE the population #Feb17 WAR CRIMINALS

Why do the “rebels” need NATO’s support if they have control and resistance has been quashed?

Why starve Tripoli residents to break them unless the resistance is ongoing and fierce?

Why do these traitors need NATO if the Libyan people have acquiesced to their domination?

The “rebels” are afraid.

They have no victory in Tripoli or any other region in Libya.

Keeping these facts in mind, I hold to the statements I made yesterday until a genuinely reliable source confirms otherwise.

While we await confirmation, please abstain from caving in to NATO psy-ops.

If we accept their lies, we are not giving our strength and attention to those who still stand and continue to valiantly resist.









par Sandra Barr,  Sandra Barr
vendredi 26 août 2011, 16:38


Im sure that there are 1000’s of people like myself, who are horrified at the genocide being commited by NATO in Libya, and I am sure that most people are like myself, and feel really helpless about the situation.

This morning I descided to take a more proactive approach.

I phoned Westminster and asked how I could have David Cameron charged with war crimes and genocide. They told me to contact my local conservative office and see if they could help!!!!!

Number for Westminister 020 7219 4272.

I called the foreign Office (020 7219 4272). I was told that all complaints about the actions of NATO in Libya should be made in writing to the Foreign Office. The lady I spoke to was very sympathetic, in fact so sympathetic that she admitted she to was horrified by their actions, still she could not help me, other than the advice to document and write to the FO. I will be doing this later today.

I phoned my MP, who will call me back when he gets into his office.

NATO HQ in the Hague Netherlands, do not have a contact phone number, but I will also be emailing them.

Lastly, I phoned the International Criminal Court (0031 705 158 515). I was told to document the charges against NATO, and email it to them. I have done this, and I would urge everyone to also do it.

If enough of us shout, they have to hear us, please circulate this note, and PLEASE PLEASE, take the 5 mins to copy and paste the email, and send it to the ICC.

This is such a small thing to do, but if thousands of us inundate the ICC with these charges, they will be forced into a corner, and they will have to act. NATO are acting as if they have immunity from all international laws, and the reason they get away with so much, is because we all give off but do nothing! They must be held accountable for their crimes.

Please feel free to re-edit, correct grammar or anything else you see fit to do. the following is the email I sent:

International Criminal court email sent 26/08/2011

NATO members that have been participating in air strikes in Libya include France, Britain, the United States, Canada, Denmark, Belgium, Netherlands, and Italy.

I would like to make formal charges against the NATO alliance for war crimes committed in Libya.

France, Britain, United States, Canada, Denmark, Belgium, Netherlands and Italy are joint members of the NATO alliance, and have all broken their UN mandate, and committed a catalogue of war crimes in Libya.

Because of their influence over the main stream press in my country (UK), I cannot even give a full and complete list of their crimes.

But the following crimes are documented, and I demand that the ICC take appropriate action, and have the leaders of the NATO alliance charged with these heinous crimes.

13 May 2011: The murder of 11 Muslim Imams in Brega.

30 April 2011: The bombing of the Downs Syndrome School in Tripoli

30 April 2011: The bombing of a Gaddafi residence, murdering Saif Gaddafi, his friend and 3 Gaddafi children.

12 June 2011: The bombing of the University of Tripoli. Death toll not yet established.

22 July 2011: The bombing of the Great Man made Waterway irrigation system, which supplies most Libyans with their drinking water.

23 July 2011: The bombing of the factory which makes the pipes for the water system, and the murder of 6 of its employees.

8th August 2011: The bombing of the Hospital at Zliten. Resulting in the murder of a minimum, of 50 human beings, many of them children. The bombing of hospitals is against all international laws, and a most grievous crime.

9 August 2011: The bombing of the village of Majer, resulting in the murder of 85 civilians. 33 Children, 32 women and 20 men.

The persistent on going bombing of the civilian population in Zliten and Tripoli, death toll not yet established. NATO are committing genocide and I DEMAND that the ICC address this matter with urgency.

David Cameron has admitted that UK special services have assisted the terrorists on the ground, this is against the UN mandate which allowed NATO to intervene in Libya, and is a war crime.

Many of the rebels have been identified as Al Qeada members, NATO working with known terrorists is a war crime, and against all international laws.

It is also my belief that NATO lied about their reasons for invading Libya, I demand that the ICC investigate these lies, and hold the NATO alliance responsible.

I also charge the ICC with working with NATO to spread propaganda and fear among the Libyan people, namely by announcing that the NTC had in their custody Saif al Islam Gaddafi and Muhammad Gaddafi, the night the terrorists (NTC) entered Tripoli. This was lies, and clearly shows collusion between the TNC terrorists and the ICC.

Libya is not Afghanistan or Iraq, and NATO will be held accountable for their crimes in Libya.

As this is a matter of great urgency, I demand that the ICC address these charges immediately, as the genocide is on going.

I am not a lawyer, and I have no legal training, but as a citizen of the UK & EU I demand justice. NATO are acting illegally, UK tax money is financing this travesty, and under EU and international law the ICC must deal with the charges I have documented, with the utmost seriousness.

Yours Sincerely Sandra Barr

Documentary evidence of the crimes.

The following link shows that before NATO decided to bomb Libya, the UN were going to bestow a humanitarian ward to Muammar Gadaffi! this is the contact on line form for the British Foreign Office. I have emailed them and demanded David Cameron be arrested for war crimes.

A Libyan man shows the body of a child to journalists visiting the mortuary of a hospital in Zliten on August 9, 2011 as Libyan authorities accused NATO of a “massacre” of 85 villagers in Majer, 10 kms (six miles) south of Zliten, in air strikes in support of rebels.

The funeral of some of the murdered at Majer.


Libyan mothers- Martyrdom is not the end, it is only a beginning

    Aisha Gaddafi, beautiful, smart and brave woman, daughter of the African Leader, lost her beloved baby in a NATO bombing on 30.04.11. Baby girl Mastura was just 6 months old, and her little cousins which died under the same NATO bomb Saif Mohammed and Carthage were 15 months and 2,9 years old.
What words can describe the loss of your beloved child. 
What kind of forgiveness can erase an anger at forces who killed your child and are chasing to kill you and your remaining family. What kind of bomb which falls upon a sleeping child can be called humanitarian. What kind of people and under which international law can issue a reward for a murder of someones family without trial.
What words can describe the loss of your beloved child. 
Who are those people called Cameron, Sarkozy, Obama?
Are they politicians, democrats? NO, they are powerful criminals. Are they human? NO, they may be militarily above every moral law, but they arebellow dignity of the ones called humansWhat did a little baby angel do to a monster called NATO, to those RAF pilotes who killed her, in order to deliberately cause pain to her family.
What did the Mothers of UK do?
Did they shed a tear for someone elses child?
NO, they went to Hyde park with their children and smile on their face, happy with their social benefits which are funded through a blood of Libyan, Iraqi and Afgan toddlers.
What did USA politicians do?
They killed Osama Bin Laden for the fifth time, in order to outcry their massacre in Libya.
What did USA mothers do? 
 They believed in their story. When will the ignorance start to be considered as a crime? What kind of mother believes in a story that wars in Iraq, Afgan, Libya are fought for USA’s freedom? What kind of mother is proud at her pilot son going to a foreign country to kill someone elses children? 
To the mother of a pilot, from a toddler killed by your son:
“Martydrom does not end something, it is only the beginning.”
To all the Libyan mothers :
“Do not stand at my grave and weep;
I am not there. I do not sleep.
I am a thousand winds that blow,
I am the diamond glints on snow,
I am the sunlight on ripened grain,
I am the gentle autumn’s rain.
When you awaken in the morning’s hush,
I am the swift uplifting rush,
Of quiet birds circled flight
I am the soft stars that shine at night.
Do not stand at my grave and cry. I am not there. I did not die.”
Death leaves a heartache no one can heal, love leaves a memory no one can steal.
While Libyan mothers mourn the loss of their children, immortals are rejoicing to meet them behind the veil. Libyan mothers can not banish dangers of NATO bombs, but they can banish fears, cause love is stronger than death, even though it can’t stop death from happening, but no matter how hard death tries,it can’t separate people from love. It can’t take away our memories either, in the end, life is stronger than death.
Aisha Gaddafi  gave a birth to a little Libyan girl today. May that girl and all the other children born during the period of foreign agression against beloved Libya , live and bring glory to Jamahiriya and never forget the crussader’s agression.
May those children be the future of Green Libya.

Amid Opposition to Leaked UN Plan for Libya, UN Refuses to Answer

Posted: 2011/08/30
From: Source
United Nations in the service of a banker elite as their private world political body and NATO as their private army? Mathaba is receiving plentiful evidence of this and the leaked “UN” plan for Libya is another death blow to the legitimacy of the now utterly defunct United Nations

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, August 29 — After Inner City Press

obtained and published the UN’s plan for Libya, complete with 200 military observers and the expectation of NATO maintaining a role, the plan’s author Ian Martin refused to answer questions, telling Inner City Press that “it’s an internal document.”

  Now that Inner City Press’ publication of the leaked report has spread, from Geneva to Doha to Istanbul to as far as The Australian, Inner City Press has asked the Office of the Spokesperson for Secretary General Ban Ki-moon a series of questions:

“On the Martin report, published on Friday, can you first provide UN description of what the document represents (esp in light of a statement by OSSG last week that is it “not a UN document”) and then state the basis for saying NATO has a continuing role, for saying that some deployments can be made without a specific mandate and more generally, on whose behalf and at whose behest this planning was done, if and when the plan was even going to be shown to member states, if so, which member states and when?”

  Several member states’ lead ambassadors at the UN have asked Inner City Press about the report, saying they’ve sent it to their capitals for analysis. At a Security Council lunch with Ban Ki-moon on August 26, Ban said he would brief the Council about it in the coming week (just as Martin has promised to belatedly give a press briefing).

  But even once the Secretariat moves to legitimate the plans by making some of them a public request to the Security Council, the question remains: on whose behalf, and for whose benefit, did the UN Secretariat engage in this planning?

  Beyond the ongoing split in the UN Security Council between the Westerners — European four plus US and its allies — and Russia and China, with IBSA (India, Brazil and South Africa) in the middle: there have been demonstrations in Libya against any international peacekeeping force.

  Inner City Press’ sources describe a fight inside Ban Ki-moon team as to which official would be sent to Tripoli, Martin or Al Khatib? It’s said that Martin is winning, and the Al Khatib may simply withdraw.

 Like Martin, Al Khatib jumped the gun and went to Benghazi with an already made plan: a five person structure, two from the rebels, two from Gaddafi, one from neither. It was rejected.

Now Martin has developed a detailed plan, apparently without a mandate. Watch this site.

Ban & Ian Martin – nouveau L. Paul Bremer?

From the UN’s transcript of its August 26 noon briefing (the UN canceled its August 29 briefing)

Inner City Press: …the [Ian] Martin report on Libya. It’s a 10-page document, and among other things, there is two things I want to ask you about… there is a statement, apparently it’s a UN statement saying that NATO’s role will continue to have responsibility after the fall of the [Muammar al-]Qadhafi Government, and saying that for this UN planning, including for 200 military observers, that no further mandate is needed from the Security Council. I wanted to know, what is the Secretary-General’s position on this, on those two statements?

Acting Deputy Spokesperson Farhan Haq: As far as that goes, I wouldn’t comment on the text of this document, which was an internal document for the Secretary-General’s information and for the information of his advisers. The Secretary-General will be talking to regional organizations at 3 p.m. this afternoon to coordinate planning, and he will talk to the press after that.

Inner City Press: how would you characterize this pretty detailed planning with the idea that Mr. Martin and Mr. al-Khatib went out to hear what the NTC [National Transitional Council] wanted or that on the video conference today he is going to hear? It seems to be a pretty detailed plan. Is this a preliminary plan? What adjective would you put on it, because it looks inconsistent with this outreach after the fact?

Acting Deputy Spokesperson Haq: No, not at all. The sort of efforts that we have been doing and the sort of efforts that Ian Martin was in place here at the United Nations to do is to plan for a possible transition down the line. We are now at the stage where we need to talk with our various partners about that. But it helps to have concrete ideas about the way forward. And those are what, for example, Ian Martin and Abdel-Elah al-Khatib were talking with people in Doha. This is what the Deputy Secretary-General has been talking with people in Addis Ababa earlier today, and this is what the Secretary-General will discuss with the regional groups this afternoon.

  But Haq and Ban Ki-moon refused to take Press questions about the exclusively published report on the afternoon of August 26. Asked more directly, Ian Martin refused to answer questions, telling Inner City Press that “it’s an internal document.” The UN canceled its regular noon briefing on August 29.


Western TV in Libya conceals, distorts and lies

Posted: 2011/08/30
From: Mathaba
Some of the reasons why the truth is not getting out of Libya about the rebel massacres, the popularity of Qaddafi, the resistance to the invasion

by Alexander Grigoriev


“I’m now under the impression that it is the Soviet TV I’m working at. Everything is censored, everything is to be approved by the London office. We’ve been filming Tripoli, the district controlled by the rebels: bodies of dead people in civilian clothes, unarmed, but bearing marks of torture. We sent the picture over to the office. Then we see it broadcast with the captions: “People of Tripoli killed by Gaddafi’s army”.
The next thing I do is, I’m calling the office, saying: in that district there is no Gaddafi army, it’s all controlled by the jihadists. They respond: “We know better!” And it’s like that all the time,” said a Russian stringer working for a mainstream TV company in Tripoli.

According to him, “nobody is interested in what is really happening”.

“In Tripoli, everything is upside down, it’s total anarchy. There are check-points everywhere, and IDs are checked so carefully that you are misled into thinking they might know English. But when you start speaking, they just stare at you blankly. There’s a soldierly European dressed as a local, attached to almost every squad.  If the ID looks suspicious, he is asked to re-check it. And it is he who makes the final decision whether to let you in further, or turn you down. It’s somewhat surprising that none of them carry the usual M-16 rifle, but a Kalashnikov“, the reporter says.

According to him, now it’s either jihadists, or armed European-looking people who are in command in Tripoli. “They seem to understand each other perfectly, though”, he adds.

“Nobody takes care of the city, there are corpses in the streets already decomposing, but nobody takes them away. There is a spot virtually saturated with blood next to each of the jihadists’ check-points, but surely, you cannot film it. Nobody is going to buy such a picture.

Yesterday we were about to go to Sirte, as the office had asked us to film the rebel victory over the Colonel’s native city. We were not let in, of course, there were the same “Europeans” standing there. But you could distinctly hear NATO aircraft flying, bombing. It seems like they’re leveling the city to the ground.

So, what we did was, we asked some “clowns” in Tripoli suburbs to pose for the cameras for The office was happy. Our picture went on air with the caption “Battle for Sirte”, the reporter says.

We would not name our colleague who is now in Tripoli. Judging by his words – and there is simply no motif for him to tell a lie – there might be more to it than the simple loss of a well-paid job.

Captured Libyan soldier: “Qaddafi gave us Dignity, I would die a thousand times for him”

Posted: 2011/08/30
From: Mathaba
Wounded Libyan soldiers at Mitiga Hospital in Tripoli on 28 August 2011

“I myself would die a thousand times for Qaddafi, even now,” said Faraj Mohamed, a 20-year-old soldier from Sirte, lying in a hospital in Tripoli as a prisoner of the Libyan rebels. “I love him because he gave us dignity, and he is a symbol for the patriotism of the country.”

At moments when the rebel guards were out of earshot, Mr. Mohamed said he fought on, fearful of a future without Colonel Qaddafi. He warned what would happen if the rebels take over Libya: “Murder and killing and stealing and chaos.”

“What is happening now is because of the rebels, not Qaddafi,” Mr. Mohamed said.

Mr. Mohamed, his leg in a cast and a wound on his back, lay with five other captives in a prison unit of the Mitiga air base hospital, with an armed guard in the hall. The rebels call them prisoners of war, but Mr. Mohamed was the only one who admitted to fighting for Colonel Qaddafi.

Two fellow patients said they were migrant workers, from Niger and Somalia, who had been falsely accused of being “mercenaries”.

Another patient, a Libyan, said he had simply been shot in the street. “I am innocent,” he said. Another was handcuffed to his bedrail.

Mr. Mohamed mentioned how many remember that when Colonel Qaddafi took power in 1969 Libya was a poor and almost entirely undeveloped nation of Bedouin herders whose oil wealth appeared to enrich mainly the foreign companies that exploited it. Qaddafi pursued development programs that helped turn Libya into a primarily urban country.

He said Colonel Qaddafi had brought Libyans self-respect by kicking out foreign colonialists; under Colonel Qaddafi, Libyans celebrated a national holiday every year on the day the United States evacuated the air base that included the hospital where Mr. Mohamed was held.

Then there was the special patronage — buildings, roads, schools, hospitals, jobs — lavished on Colonel Qaddafi’s two former hometowns, Sirte and Sabha. Sirte flourished as Colonel Qaddafi’s favorite place to hold conferences, Mr. Mohamed said of the Mediterranean port city that is his hometown as well.

“Sirte really loves Qaddafi,” he said. “And they will fight for him.”

But he also professed a high-minded fear that without Colonel Qaddafi’s strong hand to preserve order, the rebels would drag Libya into chaos. In a Tripoli neighborhood supportive of Colonel Qaddafi, Mr. Mohamed recalled, he met residents who “said they were scared the rebels would rape the women and kill the men.”

Residents fought for the Colonel even after it was said rebels were inside his compound. Also Mr. Mohamed fought on until the next day, when his militia was in a battle and the rebels shot him.

“I would sacrifice myself, I would sacrifice my family,” he said. “I would die for Qaddafi.”