PDA

View Full Version : Military Actions Against Libya


Caledonian
Saturday, March 19th, 2011, 11:30 PM
Western forces could launch bombing raids against the Libyan regime as early as Friday after the UN backed international military action.

By Robert Winnett,, Deputy Political Editor, Jon Swaine in New York and Richard Spencer in Tripoli 11:26PM GMT 17 Mar 2011

The first raids, possibly conducted by unmanned drones, could happen within hours if Colonel Gaddafi acts on his threat to "show no mercy" to rebels in Benghazi.

The RAF could become involved in any operation by this evening, according to British sources. However, the raids may be spearheaded by an Arab nation such as Qatar or the UAE.

Last night, Col Gaddafi threatened to launch retaliation attacks against passenger aircraft in the Mediterranean if foreign countries launch air strikes against Libya.

The Libyan regime said that "any foreign military act" would expose "all air and maritime traffic in the Mediterranean Sea" as targets for a counter attack.

The warning was sounded within hours of the American Government formally backing a joint British and French initiative for a no-fly zone and other military action to be taken against Col Gaddafi's regime.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/8389565/Libya-UN-approves-no-fly-zone-as-British-troops-prepare-for-action.html


LONDON – Any decision to impose a no-fly zone over battle-torn Libya should be taken by the United Nations and "not the United States", US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told Sky News on Tuesday.

"I think it's very important that it is not a US-led effort because this comes from the people of Libya themselves," Clinton said. "We think it is important that the United Nations make that decision.

"This doesn't come from the outside. This doesn't come from some Western power or some Gulf country saying: 'This is what you should do.'"

The United States came in for severe international criticism when it invaded Iraq in 2003, an action which Kofi Annan, the then secretary general of the United Nations, said "was not in conformity with the UN Charter".

"We'd like to see this resolved peacefully, we'd like to see him (Libyan leader Moamer Kadhafi) go peacefully and we'd like to see a new government come peacefully," explained Clinton.

"If that's not possible we are going to work with the international community, but there are countries that do not agree with that.

"There is long road ahead for being able to resolve this," warned Clinton.

TAKE ACTIONPetitions by Change.org|Get Widget|Start a Petition »Fighting intensified in the north Africa country Tuesday as pro-Kadhafi forces launched air and rocket attacks on rebels in Zawiya, sources in the town said.

"We've called for Kadhafi to leave and he has totally given up any legitimacy to power. When a leader turns against his own people that is the end," stated Clinton.

The UN Security Council Tuesday discussed the possibility of imposing a no-fly zone during talks on the turmoil sweeping North Africa, a UN official confirmed.

"There were lots of issues that were discussed this morning, the no-fly zone was one of the issues," UN under secretary general Lynn Pascoe told reporters after briefing the 15-nation Security Council.

"There was a very serious, a very much inter-active discussion on the various issues involved and the role of the council and the role of the secretariat," he added.

Clinton's remarks echoed earlier comments from British Foreign Secretary William Hague.

"There must be a demonstrable need that is accepted broadly by the international community, as well as the strong international support that would come from that," Hague said.

Earlier Tuesday, US President Barack Obama and British Prime Minister David Cameron agreed to plan a "full spectrum of responses" on Libya, including a no-fly zone, surveillance and a relief effort, Cameron's Downing Street office said.

The British leader later slammed Kadhafi on popular BBC entertainment programme, "The One Show".

"I had a phone call with President Obama this afternoon to talk about the planning we have to do in case this continues and in case he does terrible things to his own people," said Cameron.

"I don't think we can stand aside and let that happen, we have got to prepare for what we might have to do if he (Kadhafi) goes on brutalising his own people."

Cameron added that international efforts were beginning to weaken the Libyan leader.

"Don't underestimate the extent to which all that isolation, the fact that the UN Security Council came together and passed that resolution very quickly.

"We need to keep on doing those things to isolate this man and his regime and say that he has got to go," he said.


http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/03/08/libya-no-fly-zone-a-un-decision-not-us-clinton/



At least 110 Tomahawk missiles fired at Libya:US


French President Nicolas Sarkozy announced that allied air forces had already gone into action.

Washington: US and British forces have fired at least 110 Tomahawk cruise missiles into Libya against Muammar Gaddafi's air defense sites, a top US military officer said on Saturday.

Admiral William Gortney told reporters that "earlier this afternoon over 110 Tomahawk cruise missiles fired from both US and British ships and submarines struck more than 20 integrated air defense systems and other air defense facilities ashore."

A senior US military official says the strike was aimed at sites along the Libyan coast.

The missiles were launched from US Navy vessels in the Mediterranean.

The official says the assault would unfold in stages and strike at air defense installations around Tripoli, the capital, and a coastal area south of Benghazi. That's the rebel stronghold under attack by Muammar Gaddafi's forces.

The series of cruise missile strikes on Libyan targets is only the first phase of a multiphase operation, a senior US military official said on Saturday.

The series of cruise missile strikes on Libyan targets is only the first phase of a multiphase operation, a senior US military official said on Saturday.

Admiral Gortney declined to discuss what the next phase of the operations would be.

Earlier, CNN reported that the US missiles hit parts of Triploi and Misrata.

Coordination

Al Jazeera television reported on Saturday that Libya's revolutionary military council was coordinating with the international coalition that had launched air-strikes against areas where Muammar Gaddafi's forces were present.

It also said Western forces had bombarded a military college near the west Libyan city of Misrata where it said Gaddafi's forces were based.

As the Arab world waited with bated breath, allied warplanes carried out sorties over Libya late on Saturday to halt the forces of Colonel Muammar Gaddafi from attacking Benghazi.

Heavily-armed troops of Gaddafi's army pushed into the outskirts of Benghazi, a city of 670,000 people which is under the control of the revolutionaries, in a bid to pre-empt allied military intervention in the country, a decision on which was expected after a meeting of Western and Arab leaders in Paris.

Minister of Foreign Affairs Shaikh Abdullah Bin Zayed Al Nahyan represented the UAE at the Paris meeting. Qatar, Iraq, Jordan and Morocco were also represented by their respective foreign ministers.

At the end of the meeting, French President Nicolas Sarkozy announced that allied air forces had already gone into action.

"It's a grave decision we've had to take," Sarkozy said after meeting British Prime Minister David Cameron, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and other leaders. She later said the US will deploy its "unique capabilities" as part of the military operation. She also said the participation of Arab leadership is crucial.

"Gaddafi continues to defy the world... attacks on civilians go on," Clinton said, adding that "further delay would only put more civilians at risk."

Members of the African Union committee on Libya will go to Tripoli on Sunday, said an official at a meeting of the group in the Mauritanian capital. Italy has offered use of its military bases for UN-backed forces enforcing the no-fly zone, Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi was quoted as saying.

Appeal to residents

A Canadian government spokesman said the country's fighter jets had only just reached the region and would need two days to prepare for any operation.

Meanwhile, doctors in Benghazi reported the deaths of at least 38 people due to indiscriminate shelling and heavy fighting when Gaddafi's army entered Misrata.

Khalid Al Aqeeli, member of the Revolutionary Council, told Gulf News that Radio of Free Libya in Benghazi called on residents to defend the city from Gaddafi's forces.

"We think we can mobilise 50,000 to 100,000 volunteers to defend the city and we will fight till the last man and woman in the city," he said.

Many residents of Misrata said government snipers were shooting people from rooftops, reports said.

However, Libyan Foreign Minister Mousa Kussa said Tripoli had met all its obligations under the UN resolution and asked UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon to send observers to monitor the ceasefire.

http://gulfnews.com/news/region/libya/at-least-110-tomahawk-missiles-fired-at-libya-us-1.779560


Like the United States really needed to invade another nation with the co opt help of other nations......

http://www.thememriblog.org/image/20203.JPG

http://img.politicallyillustrated.com/ph-obama-thinker.jpg

http://lh6.ggpht.com/_vatTtEfkYlo/TXp_qxvcRQI/AAAAAAAAAnE/TXgCyYbgDmA/Obama-oil%20sniff_thumb%5B2%5D.gif?imgmax=800

Caledonian
Saturday, March 19th, 2011, 11:49 PM
Libya's Qaddafi stands between the United States and their campaign of destabilization and regime change across the oil laden region. Not only does this stall the Anglo-American agenda, it also sets a precedence of defiance other sovereign nations may duplicate under similar US-backed instability.

There is no doubt that the unrest in Tunisia, Egypt, and now Libya is US-backed. Libyan opposition leader Ibrahim Sahad of the National Front for the Salvation of Libya (NFSL) is literally sitting in front of the White House in Washington D.C. giving interviews, repeating verbatim the talking points covered by propaganda outfits like BBC, CNN, Fox News, and AlJazeera. Meanwhile, a myriad of US organizations are working in tandem with Sahad's calls for UN, EU, US, and NATO intervention.

What form might intervention take and is there a possibility that US military support is already underway? According to Brookings Institute's report "Which Path to Persia?" it is very possible military operations and support were planned well ahead of time.

In regards to sparking a revolution in Iran, Brookings concludes that Iran will most assuredly crush it at any cost, ensuring the revolution's failure. Considering this, Brookings insists certain measures must be taken to diminish Iran's ability to crush such a revolution (p 109, 110):


"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."

One of the authors of "Which Path to Persia?" globalist RAND policy wonk & 9/11 Commission white-washer, Daniel Byman, has been quite vocal lately regarding Libya. In a piece written in Slate titled, "Things Could Get a Lot Worse in Libya," Byman concludes by saying a massive invasion of Libya is "not going to happen." Rather he suggests the US "organize the opposition to Qaddafi, encouraging a broad political front and urging military leaders to declare their support for this."

It turns out, according to the Library of Congress Federal Research Division archives, that Sahad's NFSL had attempted to violently overthrow Qaddafi in 1984. The Library of Congress document goes on to explain that "according to various sources, the United States Central Intelligence Agency [CIA] trained and supported" NFSL before and after the failed coup. With this back story, it is highly unlikely that US strategists naively expected a "Velvet Revolution" in Libya, and most likely modified their 1984 plans to overthrow Qaddafi with armed rebels.

While President Obama shamelessly lies to the world about US hands being clean of interference with Libya's sovereignty, it appears that the NFSL has a long history of being supported and directed by the US, most apparent with NFSL's leader currently operating out of Washington DC. It also appears that the NFSL is already armed to the teeth and waging a military campaign against Qadaffi on the back of US-stoked regional instability. Even Qaddafi himself is accusing the West of arming the NFSL in this latest round of Libyan unrest.

BBC propagandist Jon Leyne's unlikely narrative that Qaddafi's security forces were overwhelmed by unarmed protesters first in Banghazi's city center, then nearly 10 miles to the east at Benina International Airport and a nearby army base defies reality. These claims are also admittedly impossible to verify and reminiscent of intentionally deceptive reports of "Russia invading Georgia" in 2008, when in reality, US equipped Georgian troops ignited the conflict under the leadership of US educated (funded by the US State Department Edmund S. Muskie Graduate Fellowship) President Mikhail Saakashvili, who himself came to power in the 2003 US-backed "Rose Revolution."

BBC continues its campaign of unsubstantiated, unverified reporting to justify the ongoing, US-backed, armed insurrection inside of Libya. They are going through extraordinary measures to misrepresent the Libyan uprising as a spontaneous revolt spurred by the Tunisian and Egyptian protests, regardless of Ibrahim Sahad's premeditated and overt involvement. BBC and other propaganda outfits are also attempting to build a case for US or possibly NATO intervention if Sahad's men are balked once again.

With the desperate shape of the US economy and the prospect of this destabilization effort failing in Libya and emboldening other nations suffering similar fates to fight back, it is an all or nothing gambit for the Anglo-Americans.

Elliot Abrams, (CFR, PNAC) recently issued a personal threat to Qadaffi and his intelligence chief that they would both meet the "same fate as Saddam Hussein," if any American is attacked in the wake of sterner US threats against Libya. Whether he meant Saddam's kangaroo court trial and hanging, or the decimation of his country and the death of a million Iraqis based on fraud and lies, readers cannot be certain. What is certain is the high price Libya will pay regardless of whether it defends its sovereignty or is folded into the degenerate Anglo-American unipolar world order.

http://www.activistpost.com/2011/02/us-libyan-intervention.html

Permafrost
Sunday, March 20th, 2011, 02:11 AM
http://spacingmontreal.ca/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/Democracy.jpg

Fohr
Sunday, March 20th, 2011, 05:19 AM
The United States becomes involved in another muslim civil war! The political situation in the west is hopeless; I now care only about my family and the good,white Germanic people i meet!

flâneur
Sunday, March 20th, 2011, 07:57 AM
"I had a phone call with President Obama this afternoon to talk about the planning we have to do in case this continues and in case he does terrible things to his own people," said Cameron.

"I don't think we can stand aside and let that happen, we have got to prepare for what we might have to do if he (Kadhafi) goes on brutalising his own people."


His concern for the poor north african civilians overwhelms me..........i wonder when they are going to start making noises about the culling of white South African farmers and their families.....and when the UN is going to consider doing something about that....?

Dont hold your breath.

RoyBatty
Sunday, March 20th, 2011, 09:43 AM
It's amazing really....

First Cameroon, Sarkojew and Ombongo sponsor and incite rebellion and anarchy in the country, then they start bombing, wrecking the infrastructure and murdering the people "in order to apparently save the people".

(Really, in order to grab the oil & gas and to install a Google, Twatter, Fagbook friendly puppet regime)

It's always the same old story. The worst Terrorists and Imperialists of the past are the worst Terrorists and Imperialists of the present.

Ingvaeonic
Sunday, March 20th, 2011, 10:10 AM
Everyone falls in when it comes to oil: the U.N., N.A.T.O., the entire "Western Alliance". All jump when given the order by the U.S. It is times and situations like these that make me wish there was some countervailing bloc to balance the world, just not a Bolshevik countervailing bloc as in the Cold War.

I HATE THE U.N.: It is a permanent intrusion and infringement on the national sovereignty of the world's countries. I'd abrogate all U.N. treaties if I were in power.

Ingvaeonic
Sunday, March 20th, 2011, 10:15 AM
It's amazing really....

First Cameroon, Sarkojew and Ombongo sponsor and incite rebellion and anarchy in the country, then they start bombing, wrecking the infrastructure and murdering the people "in order to apparently save the people".

(Really, in order to grab the oil & gas and to install a Google, Twatter, Fagbook friendly puppet regime)

It's always the same old story. The worst Terrorists and Imperialists of the past are the worst Terrorists and Imperialists of the present.

They have manipulated and engineered a war to seize Libya's oil reserves, of that there is no doubt. America's Zionist masters have worked through their agents in the U.S. and from Israel itself. It is so obvious when oil is concerned in the Middle East or North Africa.

RoyBatty
Sunday, March 20th, 2011, 12:54 PM
Everyone falls in when it comes to oil: the U.N., N.A.T.O., the entire "Western Alliance". All jump when given the order by the U.S. It is times and situations like these that make me wish there was some countervailing bloc to balance the world, just not a Bolshevik countervailing bloc as in the Cold War.


The USSR / Eastern Block of post-WW2 wasn't Bolshevik. It was USSR dominated Communist. That's not the same thing as Bolshevik.

The Bolsheviks in Eastern Europe were mostly wiped out in the 1930's during Stalin's purges. They also established themselves in the US where they remained in the shadows before re-emerging as the US NeoCon movement.

In my opinion the USSR / Eastern Block was a good thing. It ensured that there was a stalemate in global power and to some extent it made the world a more stable place and inhibited ZOG's ability to terrorise at will.


I HATE THE U.N.: It is a permanent intrusion and infringement on the national sovereignty of the world's countries. I'd abrogate all U.N. treaties if I were in power.

ZOG would simply invent another excuse if it weren't for the UN. When the UN wouldn't do their bidding (Iraq) Stormtrooper Dumbya simply declared the UN "irrelevant". With or without it, they'll do what they like.

I agree that it's a worthless institution though.

velvet
Sunday, March 20th, 2011, 01:27 PM
Isnt it telling who's using the mandate now?

Britain: Cameron - the Jew
France: Sarkozy - the Jew
USA: Obama - pseudo-"christian"(?) puppet with visible strings*

(*it wouldnt surprise me at all to learn that his mother in fact was a converted Jew, really)

While the press conference with Sarkozy still was ongoing, his military already made facts and started to bombard Libya. They couldnt even wait so long....


Re UN: Earlier in tv I saw a nuclear expert talking about the deceit by UN "pseudo scientists" who still claim that the effects of Tchernobyl are far from real and that the damage by nuclear radiation cannot be proven. Yeah, that is also why there is a 30km radius protection zone :oanieyes . And the several Japanese emergency team members died due to their imagination.....

The UN is a global terror organisation, Gaddafi is right with that observation. Russia has distanced itself from the military operation, China announced its regrets over the civil victims of the UN mandated attack against them. While the retarded German foreign minister Westerwelle announced 5mio Euro for the support of the rebels at the borders to Libya....


Yesterday when I watched news on tv, the reporter rehashed the events from Tunesia and Egypt, and while talking about "peaceful protests", a picture of a guy pointing a rocket-powered grenade on the city (and civilists of) Tunis decorated the background.....


Marius Müller Westernhagen sang around 1980:
Lieber Gott, wir brauchen keinen Weltuntergang,
das machen wir schon selber, da fackeln wir nicht lang....

(dear lord, we dont need an armageddon, we will do that all by ourselves, we won't hesitate)


Sick world.... :(

Balders gate
Sunday, March 20th, 2011, 08:06 PM
That is all the United States needs another war. Let me guess this is about the freedom of Libya. Yea right, maybe this is about oil too. The only difference with this and Bush's wars is this has unilateral support from some countries, unlike Bush who had almost none. Why the change from some countries? Why is France all of a sudden sending fighter jets over? I respect countries like Germany and Russia, at least they said no as before to this conflict. But I do not know why the change? is it because Obama is the MAN and Bush was just a COWBOY I don't know. Where are all the war protesters in the streets and the media coverage is not so bad towards Obama. Gee wiz what a 360 degree difference in the attitude amongst the media and the United Nations than the situation in Iraq. Who gave us the right to invade Iraq? Who gives us the right to drop bombs in Libya. You know civilians will be killed as they are right now in Afghanistan under do I dare say Obama. He is always sending drones to kill people in Afghanistan all the time. Where the hell is the left wing protesters? The media will say Obama is the great liberator of dictators in the middle east. Does anybody notice the difference of American opinion and the world opinion for that matter on the bombing of Libya. it does not matter how you start the war people are still going to get killed and America will have more blood on it's hand. I don't care if it is Bush or Obama It still is blood and oil.

RoyBatty
Sunday, March 20th, 2011, 08:53 PM
Why the change from some countries? Why is France all of a sudden sending fighter jets over? I respect countries like Germany and Russia, at least they said no as before to this conflict. But I do not know why the change? is it because Obama is the MAN and Bush was just a COWBOY I don't know.

Why the support from France?

Simple - France now has a Jew President & ruling junta. During the Iraq War in 2003 it didn't and hence the government at that time didn't support the invasion.

The UK's position remained the same and supported this war against Lybia because scheming, attacking and stealing is what the UK is a master at and has been a master at for centuries. It's part of the country's DNA.

One shouldn't read too much into the POTUS personality cult. Ombongo, Bush etc aren't much more than figureheads or talking heads doing the bidding of their sponsors & financiers in Wall Street.

Emotionell
Sunday, March 20th, 2011, 09:16 PM
David Cameron isn't a jew, Barack Obama is not a jew - sure it is important to point out jewish power but this thread took a wrong turn somewhere. If you would like to point out jews you can always point out Khaddafi:

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/142593

There are of course several reasons why they attack Libya. Oil is of course one and the along with the fact that the rebells are more pro-west than Khaddafi is.

Neither the thread or the the war is in anyway surprising.

Neophyte
Sunday, March 20th, 2011, 09:35 PM
There are of course several reasons why they attack Libya. Oil is of course on
e and the along with the fact that the rebells are more pro-west than Khaddafi is.

Indeed. Just look at who it was that opposed the intervention. The BRIC-countries are beginning to shape up and get their stuff together, so it was probably high time for Nato to act.

velvet
Sunday, March 20th, 2011, 10:02 PM
David Cameron isn't a jew


Cameron's forebears have a long history in finance. His father Ian was senior partner of the stockbrokers Panmure Gordon, in which firm partnerships had long been held by Cameron's ancestors, including David's grandfather and great-grandfather,[8] and was a director of estate agent John D Wood. David Cameron's great-great grandfather Emile Levita, a German-Jewish financier who obtained British citizenship in 1871, was the director of the Chartered Bank of India, Australia and China which became Standard Chartered Bank in 1969.[15] His wife, Cameron's great-great grandmother, was a descendant of the wealthy Danish Jewish Rée family.[16][17] One of Emile's sons, Arthur Francis Levita (died 1910, brother of Sir Cecil Levita),[18] of Panmure Gordon stockbrokers, together with great-great-grandfather Sir Ewen Cameron,[12] London head of the Hongkong and Shanghai Bank, played key roles in arranging loans supplied by the Rothschilds to the Japanese central banker (later Prime Minister) Takahashi Korekiyo for the financing of the Japanese Government in the Russo-Japanese war.[19]

Source: wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Cameron#Family)

:shrug

RoyBatty
Sunday, March 20th, 2011, 10:25 PM
David Cameron isn't a jew.....

....and that's all I needed to read to know the rest of your post was rubbish

Better luck next time.

flâneur
Monday, March 21st, 2011, 06:44 AM
There are of course several reasons why they attack Libya.

OK,but why no sanctions against Israel who attack civilians on a regular basis with tanks,attack helicopters and white phos.....?

How comes that the west has become compassionate and altruistic all of a sudden....?

Emotionell
Monday, March 21st, 2011, 11:00 PM
OK,but why no sanctions against Israel who attack civilians on a regular basis with tanks,attack helicopters and white phos.....?

How comes that the west has become compassionate and altruistic all of a sudden....?
The first question I expect you to know the answer to. Israel and USA have a deep alliance that Israel profit far more from than USA, most Americans seem to be OK with that since Jewish power and christian zionist churches support israel blindly and dosen't let any opposition through in for example the media or any high level of goverment office.

This is of course the same for the rest of the west who buys everything america does because of it's hugh influence.

Ocko
Tuesday, March 22nd, 2011, 12:56 AM
I Wonder why the mediterrenian EU-States are involved. What is the reasoning behind that? The Navy-power of those states? The close proximity to it?

'They' are using DU (depleted Uranium) in Libya which will come through dust and gases and weather streaming into Europe. The effects are devastating and can be very crippling for the babies who will develope in a radioactive environment.

What I also cannot foresee is the situation in France itself: What are the arabs doing overthere? Are they supportive to Gaddafi or do they go with the rebels? I am sure Sarkojew wants to get rid of them and wants to get tough at them. He might prefer the darker ones as immigrants to his host country.

I believe there might be developing something in France which will bring a clash between immigrants and french people. Would like to see how that developes.

Zimobog
Tuesday, March 22nd, 2011, 01:21 AM
If I were POTUS I'd say to the Libyans:

"Good luck in your little civil war. I look forward to buying cheap oil from which ever one of you wins. Goodbye."

MountainGuardian
Tuesday, March 22nd, 2011, 01:50 AM
Just thinking out loud here.. or so to speak..

It seems to me, very odd that Arabic governments, many of whom are fighting civillian rebellions rather violently themselves, would ask western governments to step in and protect Lybian civillians, who are attacking the legitimate government. Doesn't that kind of set a precedent where they are concerned also?

If the western governments are right to bomb Lybia to protect the Lybian civillians from the legal government... Does that mean that Iran has a claim to protect the Bahrain civillians from their legal government?

Iran attacking Bahrain... can anyone say WWIII

Ocko
Tuesday, March 22nd, 2011, 04:09 AM
The time might be right for Iran to attack Bahrain.

Gaddhafi will keept the american fleet busy, china may not like it when Iran is attacked and Russia as well, that would keep the score even.

The terrain in Iran is so difficult the american war machine can only create distruction there but not win the country nor the oil.

As far as I know Iran, Libya, Syria, North Korea (and in the past Irak) were the only states on earth who did not allow a Rothschild bank (or one of their fronts) in their country. Hence the axis of evil

velvet
Tuesday, March 22nd, 2011, 10:43 AM
If I were POTUS I'd say to the Libyans:

"Good luck in your little civil war. I look forward to buying cheap oil from which ever one of you wins. Goodbye."

With such a POTUS, there would be no civil war in Libya in the first place.

But POTUS is nothing like that, and so it is waged to create even cheaper oil, to oil the war machinery of POTUS, to grab control over the oil for which POTUS doesnt want to pay a proper price, to grab control of another piece of the world, to include another piece of the world into world finance terrorism.

Ahnenerbe
Tuesday, March 22nd, 2011, 02:35 PM
Well, seems like the French and British underdogs have finally found a target of their relevance and that they feel confident enough to engage :D

It is no coincidence that the current heads of both states are bastard runts with huge inferiority complexes (plus that ugly old rag Hillary Clinton trying to give herself a new importance). And it's probably easier for them than to address the racial riots in their own streets, where the cops aren't even allowed to shoot.

Seems also the US government developed new-found values against "killing innocent civilians" lol. But this time our little heroes are so afraid of the bodybag, they won't even put their feet on Libyian ground. They have already started making fun of themselves (The US Army: running on Nazi technology since '45... (http://forums.skadi.net/redirector.php?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thes un.co.uk%2Fsol%2Fhomepage%2Fnews%2F34836 46%2FBritish-attempt-to-wipe-out-Libya-top-brass-and-perhaps-even-Colonel-Gaddafi-himself-is-cancelled-to-save-TV-news-crew-in-firing-line.html)and still t (http://forums.skadi.net/redirector.php?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thes un.co.uk%2Fsol%2Fhomepage%2Fnews%2F34836 46%2FBritish-attempt-to-wipe-out-Libya-top-brass-and-perhaps-even-Colonel-Gaddafi-himself-is-cancelled-to-save-TV-news-crew-in-firing-line.html)rying to figure it out (http://forums.skadi.net/redirector.php?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thes un.co.uk%2Fsol%2Fhomepage%2Fnews%2F34836 46%2FBritish-attempt-to-wipe-out-Libya-top-brass-and-perhaps-even-Colonel-Gaddafi-himself-is-cancelled-to-save-TV-news-crew-in-firing-line.html))

The heart of the problem as always is that as long as we will have simple-minded, do-gooder Germanics enlisting in the armies of the West, thinking they are working for "their" country, governments will have useful idiots at their disposal.

But Colonel Gaddafi is a smart guy. He'll probably find a way to bog down the Westerners through assymetric warfare and ridiculize them like Vietnam, Somalia, Iraq, Afghanistan before it. The main reason why they hate Gaddafi is not his supposed 'evil', it's just that he didn't whore himself to them like 95% of other third world countries where the US openly or secretly holds military bases, police offices, fortress-like embassies and dictate the local policies and do what they please just like at home.

At least Muammar has style, he's laughing at death and makes fun of them all. :thumbup


http://cdn1.newsone.com/files/2010/09/gaddafi_dw_politik__545028g.jpg

Muammar is the shit :D



http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2007/12_02/gaddafiEPA1012_468x533.jpg

Colonel Gaddafi vs. Mellah Sarkozy: Which one is whiter? Not easy to tell.

MountainGuardian
Tuesday, March 22nd, 2011, 03:18 PM
We crashed a jet today on Lybian soil.... technically we have American boots on Lybian soil now

What do you think... does that make a case for an American rescue mission? I would only be a few American boots... lol

I can see it already....

MountainGuardian
Tuesday, March 22nd, 2011, 03:24 PM
Well so much for that scenario... I guess the pilots are already out of Lybia...

Weird, the idea of fighting a war where the people actually support you for it instead of hate you...

RoyBatty
Tuesday, March 22nd, 2011, 05:49 PM
Just thinking out loud here.. or so to speak..

It seems to me, very odd that Arabic governments, many of whom are fighting civillian rebellions rather violently themselves, would ask western governments to step in and protect Lybian civillians, who are attacking the legitimate government. Doesn't that kind of set a precedent where they are concerned also?


#1 - most of those Arab Governments are pawns of ZOG / USA / EU.
#2 - most of them are universally despised by their own Citizens.
#3 - the only reason they rubberstamped this NATO war of aggression against Libya is because they were instructed to do so by the ZOG high command.
#4 - whether it sets a precedent or not, the only universal truth is that power comes from the barrel of a gun and the truth will be written in history books by the victors of the conflict.
#5 - "the pen is mightier than the sword"... whoever wrote this idiotic cliche can easily be proven wrong.


If the western governments are right to bomb Lybia to protect the Lybian civillians from the legal government... Does that mean that Iran has a claim to protect the Bahrain civillians from their legal government?



Might Makes Right. The Winners Make The Rules. Justice has nothing to do with it.

Iran attacking Bahrain... can anyone say WWIII

Ain't gonna happen, even if it did there's no WW3 scenario here.

The time might be right for Iran to attack Bahrain.

Gaddhafi will keept the american fleet busy, china may not like it when Iran is attacked and Russia as well, that would keep the score even.

This is slightly off topic but Russia is a bit of a basket case at the moment. I've had my suspicions about it for some time but it's now clear that a powerstruggle is emerging between Medvedev and Putin.

Medvedev is a crypto-Jew and ZOG agent. Putin is probably more of a Nationalist.

Either way, there's trouble brewing between the two. One of the reasons Russia probably abstained during the UN Vote on a "No Fly Zone" (which in real terms = a blank cheque for attacking it) is because Medvedev would have supported the resolution but in order to appease Putin they "abstained" instead of voted against.

Anyway, the gloves seem to be off now.... interesting times ahead.

So.... What I'm trying to say is that I wouldn't bet any money right now on Russia seriously protesting further NATO aggression around the world.

Neophyte
Tuesday, March 22nd, 2011, 11:02 PM
The Indian parliament is pretty much against:

NEW DELHI: A bitterly fractious Lok Sabha came together on Tuesday to adopt a resolution condemning the air strikes on Libya by allied forces.

The resolution, moved by finance minister and leader of the House Pranab Mukherjee, was unanimously adopted on a day when the government and the opposition again tussled, with the BJP seeking to initiate breach of privilege proceedings against Prime Minister Manmohan Singh for "misleading" Parliament on the "cash-for-vote" scam.

Speaking for the House, Mukherjee said, "No external powers should interfere in it... What is happening in Libya is an internal affair of that country. Nobody, no two or three countries can take a decision to change a particular regime in a third country."

...

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Parties-unite-to-slam-strikes-on-Libya/articleshow/7766649.cms



Note that it was unanimous. By creating a united front in the Indian parliament Obama is certainly beginning to live up to his peace prize.

Godwinson
Tuesday, March 22nd, 2011, 11:29 PM
So that's now India, Brazil, Russia and China who have ALL called for an immediate end to this nonsense. These countries alone (and there are many others!) must represent the majority of the world's population.

It's a wonderful thing, isn't it, this "democracy" we keep hearing about, and so flexible in its interpretation ;) If this conflict serves no other purpose it will at least confirm that there is a small clique of nations who have now become a law unto themselves!!!

RoyBatty
Wednesday, March 23rd, 2011, 07:53 AM
The Indian parliament is pretty much against:
Note that it was unanimous. By creating a united front in the Indian parliament Obama is certainly beginning to live up to his peace prize.

Problem with the Indians are that if you wave a banana and 10 rupees in their face they quickly change their tune again.

Whilst BRIC may in principle be against this aggression they sadly did nothing to prevent it when they could have.


So that's now India, Brazil, Russia and China who have ALL called for an immediate end to this nonsense. These countries alone (and there are many others!) must represent the majority of the world's population.

It's a wonderful thing, isn't it, this "democracy" we keep hearing about, and so flexible in its interpretation If this conflict serves no other purpose it will at least confirm that there is a small clique of nations who have now become a law unto themselves!!!


Indeed, India or China's population alone exceeds that of the US & EU combined.

This "International Community" the USA keeps talking about.... lol.....let's see who they are:

USA + Marshall Islands + Israel + Vanautu + EU stooges... usually :D

flâneur
Wednesday, March 23rd, 2011, 11:31 AM
Its interesing to note that the Americans are not calling for a regime change yet Britain and France are.
I wonder when the Anglo French armada will invade Libya...im sure the British can rustle up a couple of land rovers and a packet of fags for the invasion.

When the bombings and air strikes have had little effect....what then ....?

The forces of the willing or whatever tag they give themselves cant even stop the insurgency in Iraq or the Taliban in Afghanistan so i dont know how they want to take on another enemy......i wonder how the jews Cameron and Sarkozy are going to wriggle out of this one.

velvet
Wednesday, March 23rd, 2011, 12:23 PM
Whilst BRIC may in principle be against this aggression they sadly did nothing to prevent it when they could have.

Could they really?

I really doubt that a veto would have stopped US / France / Britain from invading Libya. If so, they would have found another excuse, as always. Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Kuweit, you name it. In doubt they orchestrate a massive terror attack to get this excuse.

RoyBatty
Wednesday, March 23rd, 2011, 06:08 PM
Could they really?

I really doubt that a veto would have stopped US / France / Britain from invading Libya. If so, they would have found another excuse, as always. Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Kuweit, you name it. In doubt they orchestrate a massive terror attack to get this excuse.

What I should have said was that Russia & China could have vetoed the UN resolution whilst the others could have voted against it. They didn't and hence the Westerners had the excuse they needed to attack Libya delivered to them on a silver platter.

It's true that a veto wouldn't have stopped the Bush Regime from attacking Libya but in this case the real eager beavers are the British and French, not the US. #

The Ombongo Regime didn't at any stage give the impression that they were really planning a serious military campaign. To me this seems plausible because typically this is not the Soros way of doing things. He's a fan of "soft power", in other words, internal Coups dressed up as "People's Liberations".

It's a slightly less messy and imo more effective way (from a PR viewpoint) of achieving Regime Change results than the Dumbya Bush steamroller approach. Ombongo and the Democrats are very much in tune with the Soros way of doing things.

My take on all this is that the British Government who are new on the job and eager for blood and glory decided to have themselves a little fun, enlisted their fellow Jew from France for Crusader Deathmatch Target Libya 2011 (since the UK by itself doesn't have the capacity to Lord it over the natives) and sort of dragged the US along with them.

The UK and France wouldn't have been able to progress to this point without their precious UN Resolution because people still remember what happened last time around in Iraq. Whilst the US can do as it pleases and ignore the UN with impunity the UK and France aren't quite in the same league.

Meister
Wednesday, March 23rd, 2011, 06:45 PM
To be fair it is a no win situation. If NATO sits back and watches, they are accused of doing nothing, while Gaddafi kills his own, if they strike, they are accused of sticking their noses in for cheap oil.

The fact is people scream out for help but then they see the bombs and the brutal truth to what they asked for and they cry foul.

I saw the same thing in the 90's in Australia the building I worked in was targeted for protest by students wanting Australia to intervene in East Timor, when troops were sent and shots were fired and people killed, it was an about face by the protestors who wanted intervention in the first place.

If you want to make an omelette, you have to crack some eggs.

RoyBatty
Thursday, March 24th, 2011, 07:33 AM
To be fair it is a no win situation. If NATO sits back and watches, they are accused of doing nothing, while Gaddafi kills his own, if they strike, they are accused of sticking their noses in for cheap oil.

We need to be careful here how we analyse the situation. The impression the Jew owned media give is that "Ghaddafi is a mad killer who kills his own people". That's BS. He's a long-time dictator who by dictatorial standards has been pretty benevolent.

Remember, the media never carried horror stories (true or false) about suppose Ghaddafi atrocities against his countrymen before. It all started up during the recent "uprising" which was planned, funded and encouraged by NATO states & Soros.

These "regime change" elements in Libya are armed. They took weapons. They started an armed insurrection. They are hardly blushing bride innocent victims types. Once you pick up a gun you're a combatant. There is no government in the world that I can think of that will simply bend over to be reamed by a handful of armed bandits challenging its authority.

The inevitable end result in Libya was a little local disturbance which was in the process of being put down by Ghaddafi who has popular support as well as popular opposition.

What NATO are doing is to arm and encourage and intervene on behalf of one side in order to topple another for their own benefit. They did the same thing in Georgia (it failed there). They did the same thing against Serbia where they armed and funded these "Kosova" organ stealing and drug dealing Muslims against the Serbs and bombed Serbia.

It's not a case of a supposed "no-win" situation at all.

It's a case of undisguised UK, French, US and NATO aggression against a country and elements in that country in order to install a puppet regime of their choosing as part of a larger strategy to control the region politically, economically and of course, to control the energy resources.

NATO isn't the world's "benevolent policeman" whose job it is to "save humanity". They like to pimp themselves as this type of "do-gooder" but it's all smoke and mirrors, an illusion, a con.


Smedley Butler on Interventionism
-- Excerpt from a speech delivered in 1933, by Major General Smedley Butler, USMC.

War is just a racket. A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of people. Only a small inside group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few at the expense of the masses.

I believe in adequate defense at the coastline and nothing else. If a nation comes over here to fight, then we'll fight. The trouble with America is that when the dollar only earns 6 percent over here, then it gets restless and goes overseas to get 100 percent. Then the flag follows the dollar and the soldiers follow the flag.

I wouldn't go to war again as I have done to protect some lousy investment of the bankers. There are only two things we should fight for. One is the defense of our homes and the other is the Bill of Rights. War for any other reason is simply a racket.

There isn't a trick in the racketeering bag that the military gang is blind to. It has its "finger men" to point out enemies, its "muscle men" to destroy enemies, its "brain men" to plan war preparations, and a "Big Boss" Super-Nationalistic-Capitalism.

It may seem odd for me, a military man to adopt such a comparison. Truthfulness compels me to. I spent thirty- three years and four months in active military service as a member of this country's most agile military force, the Marine Corps. I served in all commissioned ranks from Second Lieutenant to Major-General. And during that period, I spent most of my time being a high class muscle- man for Big Business, for Wall Street and for the Bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism.

I suspected I was just part of a racket at the time. Now I am sure of it. Like all the members of the military profession, I never had a thought of my own until I left the service. My mental faculties remained in suspended animation while I obeyed the orders of higher-ups. This is typical with everyone in the military service.

I helped make Mexico, especially Tampico, safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefits of Wall Street. The record of racketeering is long. I helped purify Nicaragua for the international banking house of Brown Brothers in 1909-1912 (where have I heard that name before?). I brought light to the Dominican Republic for American sugar interests in 1916. In China I helped to see to it that Standard Oil went its way unmolested.

During those years, I had, as the boys in the back room would say, a swell racket. Looking back on it, I feel that I could have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he could do was to operate his racket in three districts. I operated on three continents.

velvet
Thursday, March 24th, 2011, 11:57 AM
These "regime change" elements in Libya are armed. They took weapons. They started an armed insurrection. They are hardly blushing bride innocent victims types. Once you pick up a gun you're a combatant. There is no government in the world that I can think of that will simply bend over to be reamed by a handful of armed bandits challenging its authority.

Indeed. "Peaceful protesters" dont point RPG's and machine guns at people.

It is interesting, however, to watch the media-BS unfold. Our reporter Antonia Rados down there so OBVIOUSLY lies about the situation, that it is really surprising that no one notices. She shows footage of "allegedly staged" pro Gaddafi protests, talks with tribes people, and just this morning I saw footage with people holding up signs reading "Mercy Sarkozy", "Stop the Bombing" and what not, while the victims of the "peaceful protesters with machine guns" and the meanwhile almost 200 raids by bombers are wiped under the carpet.... do we really want to believe that no one yet was hurt by that?



Oh, btw, meanwhile, in Israel:

While the world public watches the play in Libya, Israel marches against the Gaza Strip and shoots 8 people, 5 of that were children, up to 100 hurt. Only mentioned in the media, because such an "evil Palestinian terrorist" blew up a bus station in Israel. :oanieyes

Godwinson
Thursday, March 24th, 2011, 02:41 PM
Ah, it seems like only yesterday that we were being shown photos like these. I think the first one should be entitled "spot the evil dictator" ...

http://img816.imageshack.us/img816/8758/bk2p.jpg (http://img816.imageshack.us/i/bk2p.jpg/)

... and I'm inviting captions for the second :D

http://img824.imageshack.us/img824/7484/bk1k.jpg (http://img824.imageshack.us/i/bk1k.jpg/)

BTW, it may be a coincidence but has anyone else noticed that since "Phony Tony" was appointed as Middle East envoy, the whole place seems to have gone up!!?? :-O

MountainGuardian
Thursday, March 24th, 2011, 03:37 PM
LOL... Caption for the second..... A little less tongue next time...

Heinrich Harrer
Thursday, March 24th, 2011, 11:45 PM
Just saw a news report on 3sat, the bias is so ridiculous. I wonder why not more people realize that we're constantly being manipulated.

When they showed the destruction and victims of the western bombardment, they said several times that this couldn't be trusted and that claims about victims couldn't be verified as Gaddafi was using these images for his own propaganda - using the footage in such a way that they could still trash Gaddafi.

Then they showed a short clip from Bengasi, in which they interviewed a civilian standing next to a house supposedly damaged during the attempted recapture of the city. The civilian said that the government troops fired on the building while there were no rebells near it, and that they wouldn't make a difference between rebells and innocent civilians/bystanders and would murder anyone they came across. This time they didn't say that there's no way to verify his claims, instead they said that 'offensichtlich' (obviously) Gaddafis troops were not there to squelch the rebellion, but to randomly murder civilians, loot and pillage (as if this one person would be a reliable source and definite proof). And they mentioned 'Zerstörungswut' (lust for destruction, destructive frenzy) like 10 times in reference to Gaddafi and the government troops, though the destruction due to the western bombardment they initially showed looked actually worse.

And yesterday I read a Spiegel article in which they mentioned that Daniel Cohn-Bendit was the main driving force in bringing the german green party in line of calling for a german participation in this war. I guess I don't have to mention his ethnicity. It's curious how they manage to be always pushing for the same agenda, no matter the party or country. It almost seems as if he has a telepathic connection with his tribe brethren Sarkozy and Cameron. :D

Enkidu
Friday, March 25th, 2011, 10:39 AM
I think Kadhafi will survive, unless the Anglo French will send ground troups to invade Libya. Even Germany was not defeated by Allied terror bombers in WW II, but only by invasion of ground troups.

Benghazi and Tobruk should not be a problem for him in the long run. I am sure he has already infiltraded sharpshooters and agitators who will cause the necessary unrest.

velvet
Friday, March 25th, 2011, 10:49 AM
The scheme unfolds: Interims Government


On 5 March 2011, a crisis committee was set up to act as the executive arm of the council. A transitional government was announced on 23 March 2011.

The executive body consists of:

* Mahmoud Jebril – interim Prime Minister
* Omar El-Hariri – head of the Military Affairs Department
* Ali al-Essawi – head of foreign affairs
* Ali Tarhouni – minister of finance


Mahmoud Jebril

Jebril is known to be leading the meeting and negotiations with french President Nicolas Sarkozy, a meeting that resulted in France officially recognizing the National Transitional Council as the sole representative of the Libyan people.

Educated at the University of Pittsburgh, he led the team who drafted and formed the Unified Arab Training (http://www.uacq8.com/Pages/default.aspx) manual. He was also responsible for organizing and administering the first two Training conferences in the Arab world in the years 1987 and 1988. He later took over the management and administration of many of the leaders’ training programs for senior management in Arab countries including Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Libya, UAE, Kuwait, Jordan, Bahrain, Morocco, Tunisia, Turkey and Britain.


Omar El-Hariri

Omar Mokhtar El-Hariri is a leading figure of the National Transitional Council or Libya and has been designated as the head of the Military Affairs Department.[1] He is in control of the Libyan People's Army and the Free Libyan Air Force.

El-Hariri was involved in the initial 1969 coup against the monarchy that brought Gaddafi into his 42 year reign over Libya. He organised a plot to overthrow Gaddafi in 1975. When the coup was uncovered, 300 men were arrested and 4 of them died during interrogation. Of the remainder 21 were sentenced to death, including El-Hariri.[2] He was imprisoned for 15 years from 1975 to 1990 under a death sentence, with 4 1/2 years in solitary confinement. Gaddafi commuted the sentence in 1990 and El-Hariri was subsequently placed under house arrest until the 2011 revolt



Ali al-Essawi

Ali al-Essawiis is a leading figure of the National Transitional Council or Libya and has been designated as the head of the Foreign Affairs Department.

He occupied the position of Minister of Economy, Trade and Investment in Libya, and was the youngest minister to fill such a post. Before taking the ministerial position, he founded the Centre for Export Development in 2006 and became the first Director General for it. He also assumed the position of Director General for the Ownership expansion program (privatization fund) in 2005



Ali Tarhouni

Ali Abdussalam Tarhouni (born 1951) is a Libyan economist. On 23 March 2011, he was appointed to Libya's National Transitional Council as finance minister.[1][2]

Born in Libya, Tarhouni studied economics at the University of Libya, until he had to flee the country in 1973. He was stripped of his citizenship, sentenced to death in absentia, and put on a government hit list in 1981.[1] After immigrating to the United States, Tarhouni continued his studies, earning a master's degree (1978) and a Ph.D. (1983) from Michigan State University. Since 1985 he has been a Senior Lecturer in Business Economics at the University of Washington Michael G. Foster School of Business.

Source (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Transitional_Council)


http://www.nzz.ch/images/sarkozy_jebril_fullSize_1.9839218.129975 9580.jpg
Nicolas Sarkozy (l.), Ali Essawi und Mahmoud Jebril (r.).

RoyBatty
Friday, March 25th, 2011, 06:40 PM
And yesterday I read a Spiegel article in which they mentioned that Daniel Cohn-Bendit was the main driving force in bringing the german green party in line of calling for a german participation in this war. I guess I don't have to mention his ethnicity. It's curious how they manage to be always pushing for the same agenda, no matter the party or country. It almost seems as if he has a telepathic connection with his tribe brethren Sarkozy and Cameron. :D

Zere is no bizniz like Jewish bizniz :D

I'm not too optimistic about Ghaddafi's chances.

They'll simply "do a Serbia" on him. In other words, NATO will wantonly bomb anything and everything worth bombing provided it's not owned by Western Corporations. (they were remarkably efficient at not damaging such installations during their aggression against Serbia).

- Libya will obviously be blockaded. (As was done with Serbia)
- Weaponry will be shipped in to the pets of the West (as was done against Serbia when the Westerners armed and equipped the other ex-Yugo states against Serbia)
- Libyans themselves will be organised against Ghaddafi (as Serbian elements were against Milosevic).

Ghaddafi is screwed really..... his borders are locked down, his shoreline is locked down, his air corridors are locked down, financially the country will be locked down, arms will flow in to all takers, Libyan infrastructure will be bombed to smithereens etc etc etc.

Once NATO attacks you you'd better pray you have nuclear weapons so that you can take a few of them with you to Valhalla.

Haliaeetus
Friday, March 25th, 2011, 06:44 PM
Here's an interview with famous Serbian political and military commentator Miroslav Lazanski (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miroslav_Lazanski) that has spent a lot of time in Libya before the war:

_0B1RXrPblM

I think it nicely sums up the situation.

RoyBatty
Saturday, March 26th, 2011, 08:00 AM
Here's an interview with famous Serbian political and military commentator Miroslav Lazanski (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miroslav_Lazanski) that has spent a lot of time in Libya before the war:

_0B1RXrPblM

I think it nicely sums up the situation.

Very interesting link and thank you for posting.

Of course we don't need to be clairvoyant to predict what will happen next after Ghaddafi is gone and the Americans and Europeans bestow the "gift of freedom and democracy" to Libya.

- American & European "economic advisors" from the finest Academic and Corporate institutions will descend like hyenas on Libya.

- They will "discover the most remarkable economic imbalances and inefficiencies" and immediately set about "advising" the "Libyan Government" (ZOG Agents) how to go about "*fixing" the economic situation.

*For a study in how Westerners "fix" countries, look at 1990's Russia after the collapse of the Soviet Union, how State Industries and resources were privatised and eventually looted or grabbed by Jewish Oligarchs

- Energy resources, property markets, service utilities, education, agriculture etc will be privatised & sold off to Conglomerates and oligarchs (naturally with Western Corps at the front of the queue)

- Subsidised education, living costs etc will become a thing of the past. After all, this is not "efficient".

- All Libyans will rejoice at their new found managed democracy under which they get to vote for a set of ZOG presented Parties and Movements. The ones who aren't kosher will be sidelined, harrassed, outlawed, have finance restricted (under Western "democracy" only money buys a chance of being "elected")

velvet
Saturday, March 26th, 2011, 10:56 AM
No Roy, that's why I posted the person information of the "rebel government", they already HAVE their ZOG puppets there, all studied in America or England, have been in several economic councils, this Unified Arab Training thingy is initiated by Westerners wanting to enlighten the Arab world with western Liberal Free Market Capitalism joys etc. There are more groups and corps like that already working, and the future parties and govt-puppets will be provided by them, presenting in the West "already accepted professionals".

The closer one looks, the more one gets the impression that the "revolution" now is not the beginning, but marks a goal prepared already since years, for which puppets were already placed, even in the govt of Libya, f.e. the minister for Trade and Economy Ali al-Essawi.





News from the Curiousity Closet

:D

Did people know that Gaddafi issues since 1989 his own »Peace Prize for Human Rights«?

Among the recipients were of course famous terrorists like Mandela, Castro and others, but also every now and then in the west condemned holohoax denies and other curiosities.

See here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Gaddafi_International_Prize_for_Human_Ri ghts)


Seen yesterday in Swiss TV, because of Jean Ziegler, a Swiss sociologists and specialist for African studies, who was supposed to get the Prize in 2002 (allegedly rejected it though), was member of the founding committee of Gaddafi's Peace Prize and some sort of advisor ever since, supposedly also personal friend of Gaddafi, and today is also member of the UN Human Rights committee - which "of course now has become unbearable" :D

ironwand
Saturday, March 26th, 2011, 04:56 PM
Here's something from a 13 Jan 2011 bona fide source:

PARIS - The French Air Force has organized a large-scale, weeklong exercise with the British Royal Air Force - which is expected to send over Tornado fighters, aerial tankers and AWACS aircraft - as part of the enhanced cooperation agreed between the two countries... The exercise, dubbed Southern Mistral, will be held March 21-25 in France, the spokesman, Maj. Eric Trihoreau, said.

France, Britain To Hold Weeklong Air Exercise (http://forums.airshows.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=30208)

AND:

Thierry Meyssan, a political analyst and founder of the international NGO Voltaire Network, claimed in an interview with RT that the French and British had been preparing the operation in Libya since November 2010, and that the stakes were high.

'Sarkozy was in big trouble with Gaddafi because he cancelled a huge contract they signed together four years ago for Rafael fighters and a lot of nuclear plants,' Meyssan said.

The situation turned against Gaddafi when his ex-chief of protocol, Nouri Massoud El-Mesmari, defected in October and went to Paris.

Anti-Gaddafi plot conceived in Paris (http://rt.com/news/voltaire-network-french-meyssan/)

Haliaeetus
Saturday, March 26th, 2011, 06:59 PM
You are right about the puppet business.
Seen all that happen here in the countries of ex-Yugoslavia. In the 80's certain people arrived in the country schooled in the US and UK, and after some time were positioned in places where they can act out as they were trained to do. In 1989 the country was totally destabilized and drawn into a civil war after which 6 small, ruined countries appeared waiting to be blessed by hungry corporations. Meanwhile all the leaders of the conflict magically die, one by one and democracy comes into these countries brought in on the hands of another set of officials trained at the same locations.
So is with the Libya. The plans were laid down a long time ago and now the time has come for them to be put into work.

TXRog
Saturday, March 26th, 2011, 09:06 PM
These actions are stupid and without just cause.
Now there are reports Al Quaeda is joining the "Libyan freedom fighters."
These same "allies" for whom we fight in Libya are our "enemies" in Afghanistan and elsewhere around the world. Am I the only one who finds this a little confusing?
Rather than support the dictatorial regimes that lead to this unrest in the first place, we (i.e., the US and other countries in the West) should start domestic drilling (including Alaska) and let the Middle East drink their oil.
The US government should enact a law that requires that a MINIMUM of 25% of the gross profits of the oil companies be set aside in a research and development fund to design and create alternative energy sources.
So many people (especially the Liberal idiots) believe we are helping the Middle East become democratic.
There is a fundamental difference between the definition of "democracy" in the West and that as interpreted by Muslims.
Freedom to them means to practice their religion as they see fit (a religion that does not tolerate any others than Islam) and to rule their society under Sharia Law.
This is a clash of culture, ideas, beliefs and peoples that will ultimately end in ruin and the loss of life of millions of people.
Of this I am confident.

velvet
Saturday, March 26th, 2011, 10:37 PM
These actions are stupid and without just cause.
Now there are reports Al Quaeda is joining the "Libyan freedom fighters."
These same "allies" for whom we fight in Libya are our "enemies" in Afghanistan and elsewhere around the world. Am I the only one who finds this a little confusing?

Not at all, when you consider that Al Quaeda actually is a CIA org, and not some group of random Afghan desert "terrorists".

So it makes absolutely sense when they now "officially" join the "freedom fighters" against the current favorite enemy of the West.


There is a fundamental difference between the definition of "democracy" in the West and that as interpreted by Muslims.
Freedom to them means to practice their religion as they see fit (a religion that does not tolerate any others than Islam) and to rule their society under Sharia Law.
This is a clash of culture, ideas, beliefs and peoples that will ultimately end in ruin and the loss of life of millions of people.
Of this I am confident.

Democrazy is the same everywhere, it comes with private banks, high taxation, privatisation of cities, public schools and state business -> massive national indebting, mindless consumerism, societal dissolution, free movement of human assets (aka labor migration), individual/minority rights terrorism, etc., Democrazy is the political structure designed for Liberal Free Market Capitalism.

But not everything that comes guised as freedom really is freedom.

"Freedom to them means to practice their own culture as they see fit" (I edited religion to culture, because that's what it is about) really is freedom, while the only freedom in the west is to go shopping. That's what democracy really means, unfortunately, consumerism to run the machine and fill the pockets of banksters.

MountainGuardian
Saturday, March 26th, 2011, 10:38 PM
Oil is not really the point here.

Taking out a government that will not join in with the global goals, is the point.

All governments that do not get with the program will eventually be taken out, whether they have anything of value or not "Afghanistan being an example of no value". Having oil is just a perk.

Notice, the countries that "have" gotten with the program are being left to freely kill civilian protesters with little complaint from the west.

Iran is "not" with the program and will eventually have be dealt with, North Korea is "not" with the program and will have to be dealt with, Venezuela is "not" with the program and will have to be dealt with.... the list goes on.....

Do you understand the point now? It is about creating a global control system and these countries refuse to join in... leaving no choice but to take them out and replace them with someone or something, that will accept the inevitable.

TXRog
Saturday, March 26th, 2011, 11:55 PM
Oil is not really the point here.

Taking out a government that will not join in with the global goals, is the point.

All governments that do not get with the program will eventually be taken out, whether they have anything of value or not "Afghanistan being an example of no value". Having oil is just a perk.

Notice, the countries that "have" gotten with the program are being left to freely kill civilian protesters with little complaint from the west.

Iran is "not" with the program and will eventually have be dealt with, North Korea is "not" with the program and will have to be dealt with, Venezuela is "not" with the program and will have to be dealt with.... the list goes on.....

Do you understand the point now? It is about creating a global control system and these countries refuse to join in... leaving no choice but to take them out and replace them with someone or something, that will accept the inevitable.

If we use as criteria (as you stated) ..."being left to freely kill civilian protesters with little complaint from the west", we (i.e, the US and any other countries foolish enough to join) will have to employ military action in the following countries:

Current Conflicts
Algeria Insurgency 1992 -->
Angola Cabinda 1975-2006?
Burma Insurgency 1950 -->
China Senkaku Islands 1968 -->
China Spratly Islands 1988 -->
China Uighur 1996 -->
Colombia Insurgencies 1970s-->
Congo (Zaire) Congo War 1998-->
Georgia Civil War 1991-->
India Assam 1985 -->
India Kashmir 1970s-->
India Naxalite Uprising 1967 -->
Israel Palestine 1967 -->
Ivory Coast Civil War 2002 -->
Korea Korean War 1953-->
Kyrgyzstan Civil Unrest 2010 -->
Libya Civil War 2011 -->
Laos Hmong Insurgency 2000 -->
Mexico Drug War 2006 -->
Namibia Caprivi Strip 1966-->
Nepal Maoists 1996-2006 ?
Nigeria Civil Disturbances 1997 -
Pakistan Baluchistan 2004 -
Pakistan Pashtun Jihad 2001 -
Palestine Civil War 2007-->
Peru Shining Path 1970s-->
Philippines Moro Uprising 1970s-->
Russia North Caucasus Insurgency 1992 -->
Somalia Civil War 1991-->
Spain Basque Uprising 1970s-->
Thailand Islamic Rebels 2001 -->
Turkey Kurdistan 1984 -->
Uzbekistan Civil Disturbances 2005 -->
Yemen Sheik al-Houti 2004 -->

It IS about oil. Africa has been marred by more than 20 major civil wars since 1960 (!) and I have yet to see the US initiating any military action there, where clearly these countries have NOT "gotten with the program are being left to freely kill civilian protesters." For now 51 years! More than half a century!

My father was in Saudi Arabia for 6 months after the end of WWII (after having served with distinction in a B-24 unit in Italy) and was then transferred to both Riyadh and Dhahran for 6 months. He told me that it was like living in a time warp, the people living exactly as they had since Biblical times. ARAMCO (now Saudi Aramaco) was busy even then (actually since 1933) punching holes in the desert in search of oil.
Oil and the profits generated thereof have empowered these people and provided them with the means and ability to now travel beyond their borders, migrating to all four corners of the globe and obtain the most sophisticated weapons that now threaten not just their own geographical region but the entire planet.
The simple question which you and other people need to ask yourselves is this...
If oil had never been discovered in the Middle East would the US and other countries ever have sent "boots on the ground" there?
I think not.

(http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/war/index.html)

Haliaeetus
Saturday, March 26th, 2011, 11:55 PM
Oil is not really the point here.

Taking out a government that will not join in with the global goals, is the point.

All governments that do not get with the program will eventually be taken out, whether they have anything of value or not "Afghanistan being an example of no value". Having oil is just a perk.

Notice, the countries that "have" gotten with the program are being left to freely kill civilian protesters with little complaint from the west.

Iran is "not" with the program and will eventually have be dealt with, North Korea is "not" with the program and will have to be dealt with, Venezuela is "not" with the program and will have to be dealt with.... the list goes on.....

Do you understand the point now? It is about creating a global control system and these countries refuse to join in... leaving no choice but to take them out and replace them with someone or something, that will accept the inevitable.

Oil or no oil, wars keep the indebted population content.
But usually it is about oil or some other resource, or securing a position for something etc. I heard that Afghanistan will host some kind of oil pipeline. Perhaps that was the reason. It is also a large opium producer. Drugs are also a good thing to have control over. But I guess we will never know the complete real truth. :)

RoyBatty
Sunday, March 27th, 2011, 08:29 AM
Oil is not really the point here.

Taking out a government that will not join in with the global goals, is the point.


Imo it is about oil as much as it is about establishing the NWO. I don't think one should analyse either goal as being of lesser importance.

Before Iraq War II (2003) I remember the Jew media running a series of stories (in various publications by different authors but essentially claiming the same thing) how the war, if it were happen, was "not about oil" but really about bringing democracy to the Middle East, nationbuilding etc. (Which of course is all BS because the US loves Arab dictatorships but I digress..........)

As an exercise, print out a map of the world some time and then mark the oil bearing regions (There is a roughly elliptical region which stretches from North Africa / Middle East up into the Caspian) and then mark the proximity of US military bases and US military activities not to mention attempts at moving the US military into regions where they are not yet established as comprehensively as ZOG would like them to be. (Particularly the Caspian & Central Asian regions).

You'll notice that many of the US military bases, oil transportation routes, pipeline routes and oil bearing regions overlap. There is no coincidence here. Once you're familiar with pipeline politics you'll essentially understand US Foreign Policy.

It is very much about the oil as it is about the NWO / US & EU Global control system.

RoyBatty
Sunday, March 27th, 2011, 08:32 AM
No Roy, that's why I posted the person information of the "rebel government", they already HAVE their ZOG puppets there, all studied in America or England, have been in several economic councils, this Unified Arab Training thingy is initiated by Westerners wanting to enlighten the Arab world with western Liberal Free Market Capitalism joys etc. There are more groups and corps like that already working, and the future parties and govt-puppets will be provided by them, presenting in the West "already accepted professionals".

You're confusing me. Did I say that they didn't?


These actions are stupid and without just cause.


Without just cause, yes.

However, they are planned and deliberate actions, planned by ZOG Wolves and executed by dumb Germanics, Negroes and Hispanics.


Now there are reports Al Quaeda is joining the "Libyan freedom fighters."
These same "allies" for whom we fight in Libya are our "enemies" in Afghanistan and elsewhere around the world.


I agree that Al Qaida = CIA.

Remember the recent spat between Pakistan & the US about the "US Diplomat" being arrested in Pakistan after murdering a couple of locals? This "diplomat" was recruiting people for the Taleban, something went wrong and an embarrassing mess ensued.

http://rt.com/usa/news/cia-contractor-recruiting-taliban/

Of course the US Govt will deny this.... and of course they only ever tell the truth, LOL!!! :D


Am I the only one who finds this a little confusing?


There's no confusion whatsoever. Look, understand this:

Most "terrorist" networks CANNOT exist without backing / assistance from countries and governments. They need bases from which to train, hide, operate. They need access to weaponry. They need access to funding. They need some kind of strategy / endgoal etc. Terrorism isn't random, there is usually some kind of strategy behind it.

It's no coincidence that Chechen terrorists are welcome guests of Europe & the US since after all they are in service of these countries.

After the Soviet Union collapsed the US quickly needed to find itself a new bogeyman in order to develop justification to launch a series of Imperialist Wars. For this they created the "Al-Qaeda" mythology.


Rather than support the dictatorial regimes that lead to this unrest in the first place, we (i.e., the US and other countries in the West) should start domestic drilling (including Alaska) and let the Middle East drink their oil.


Social unrest is not caused by dictatorial regimes. For example, do you see any problems worth mentioning in Saudi Arabia? I don't. Why? Because the local dictatorship (extended monarchy in this case) does not tolerate dissent.

Social unrest of the type we're seeing in the Middle East atm is the result of political, military and economic destabilisation organised and sponsored from OUTSIDE those countries. (by the US and EU in other words)

There will be domestic drilling too but why use up local reserves when one can control and profit handsomely from foreign reserves? In other words, it's cheaper and way more profitable to steal somebody else's than use one's own.


The US government should enact a law that requires that a MINIMUM of 25% of the gross profits of the oil companies be set aside in a research and development fund to design and create alternative energy sources.


There are loads of alternatives but none are really viable or cost effective. The US's real problem is rooted in its car & suburbia culture & demographics and its aversion to Public Transport of any kind. "Alternative Energy" is of little use unless the above problems are resolved.

The chances of them being resolved? Imo, those chances are zero.


So many people (especially the Liberal idiots) believe we are helping the Middle East become democratic.


They are idiots for thinking the export of "democracy" is a good thing.
They are idiots for thinking that democracy is a good thing.


There is a fundamental difference between the definition of "democracy" in the West and that as interpreted by Muslims.


There is a fundamental difference between democracy and "Western Democracy" as well. Very few Westerners grasp this basic fact either.

"Democracy" = supposedly level playing field, one man one vote, anybody supposedly can present themselves as candidates.

"Western Democracy" = Democracy of the Wealthy & Media Controllers. No money & No Media Ownership & Control = No chance.


Freedom to them means to practice their religion as they see fit (a religion that does not tolerate any others than Islam) and to rule their society under Sharia Law.


To some, not all. Believe it or not, not all Muslims are identical clones.


This is a clash of culture, ideas, beliefs and peoples that will ultimately end in ruin and the loss of life of millions of people.


Germanic & White Nations are ALREADY LOSING MILLIONS OF PEOPLE thanks to ZOG financial terrorism and population demographics changing measures. (Liberalism, mass 3d world immigration etc). White / Germanic countries white populations are falling, the immigrant numbers are rising.

All this happens without a shot being fired. All this is being organised by the Plutocracy, the Aristocracy, the Elites.

They keep the masses occupied with obsessions about "Islam"... and whilst these masses obsess about the Islamic bogeyman, ZOG takes control of the media, Academia, Police, Government, Military etc.

velvet
Sunday, March 27th, 2011, 01:21 PM
You're confusing me. Did I say that they didn't?


I'd never confuse you :P

You said "they will" (future), just picked that up. It's just weird that they have their figures already placed for so long (for several years in high positions), at least in Libya (that former Economy and Trade ministers, who now plays also "rebel govt"). What kept them from starting that earlier? Or more silent from within, instead of inciting a civil war?

This looks like there's an intent to create a situation like in Afghanistan (with peace missions and western military support to place government and build infrastructure that makes it easy for the west to control etc), but this doesnt make sense to me, because Afghanistan doesnt work out that well so far, and another such mess cant really be the interest.

Unless of course.... ZOG simply enjoys the little genocide / civil war here and there.... then it runs perfect for them...

But I never paid really attention in the past to North Africa, so maybe I just missed a detail.... :scratch

Caledonian
Monday, March 28th, 2011, 03:26 PM
We crashed a jet today on Lybian soil.... technically we have American boots on Lybian soil now

What do you think... does that make a case for an American rescue mission? I would only be a few American boots... lol

I can see it already....

Actually we do have American boots on the ground it's just that officially nobody is wanting to admit that they are there.

In order to have sophisticated air attacks on Libyan tanks which we see pictures of all the time in the media one would need ground troops with laser positioning target finders for precise attacks from the air.

You can bet the CIA is there along with many other special OPS soldiers traveling in small manned teams. [Along with a host of news journalist puppets covering what they are told to report.]

Caledonian
Monday, March 28th, 2011, 03:30 PM
Zere is no bizniz like Jewish bizniz :D

I'm not too optimistic about Ghaddafi's chances.

They'll simply "do a Serbia" on him. In other words, NATO will wantonly bomb anything and everything worth bombing provided it's not owned by Western Corporations. (they were remarkably efficient at not damaging such installations during their aggression against Serbia).

- Libya will obviously be blockaded. (As was done with Serbia)
- Weaponry will be shipped in to the pets of the West (as was done against Serbia when the Westerners armed and equipped the other ex-Yugo states against Serbia)
- Libyans themselves will be organised against Ghaddafi (as Serbian elements were against Milosevic).

Ghaddafi is screwed really..... his borders are locked down, his shoreline is locked down, his air corridors are locked down, financially the country will be locked down, arms will flow in to all takers, Libyan infrastructure will be bombed to smithereens etc etc etc.

Once NATO attacks you you'd better pray you have nuclear weapons so that you can take a few of them with you to Valhalla.

They are already sending weapons to the rebels as we speak through Egypt in Libya.

Caledonian
Monday, March 28th, 2011, 03:36 PM
These actions are stupid and without just cause.
Now there are reports Al Quaeda is joining the "Libyan freedom fighters."
These same "allies" for whom we fight in Libya are our "enemies" in Afghanistan and elsewhere around the world. Am I the only one who finds this a little confusing?
Rather than support the dictatorial regimes that lead to this unrest in the first place, we (i.e., the US and other countries in the West) should start domestic drilling (including Alaska) and let the Middle East drink their oil.
The US government should enact a law that requires that a MINIMUM of 25% of the gross profits of the oil companies be set aside in a research and development fund to design and create alternative energy sources.
So many people (especially the Liberal idiots) believe we are helping the Middle East become democratic.
There is a fundamental difference between the definition of "democracy" in the West and that as interpreted by Muslims.
Freedom to them means to practice their religion as they see fit (a religion that does not tolerate any others than Islam) and to rule their society under Sharia Law.
This is a clash of culture, ideas, beliefs and peoples that will ultimately end in ruin and the loss of life of millions of people.
Of this I am confident.

There is no democracy in the west. It's a myth and it is also very illusionary.

In the west we have a centralized authoritarian oligarchy that controls the local populance by hosts of central institutions and judicial proceedings.

You also have the military and police working side by side in controlling the local populance so that the workers are forced to keep working by accepting their fate to whatever the ruling classes decide for them.

I dare anybody to show me where democracy exists in western civilization.

Western government equals a authoritarian one it's just that western civilization is so effective at manipulation that it has achieved what was once thought impossible by convincing slaves that in all reality they are free....

Godwinson
Monday, March 28th, 2011, 03:48 PM
Actually we do have American boots on the ground it's just that officially nobody is wanting to admit that they are there.

In order to have sophisticated air attacks on Libyan tanks which we see pictures of all the time in the media one would need ground troops with laser positioning target finders for precise attacks from the air.

You can bet the CIA is there along with many other special OPS soldiers traveling in small manned teams. [Along with a host of news journalist puppets covering what they are told to report.]

I'm heartily sick of hearing about the RAF's exploits, which are completely dominating the UK news at the moment.

It basically amounts to bullying a third world country with no sophisticated weaponry, but Mr Cameron paid tribute to the "skilful and dangerous work" done by pilots who destroyed 22 tanks, armoured vehicles and heavy guns over the weekend and flew deep into the desert this morning to target bunkers.

OMG :oanieyes ... if taking free pot-shots at defenceless Arabs is considered to be "skilful and dangerous" I do hope we never get into a REAL war!!!!!

Godwinson
Monday, March 28th, 2011, 04:17 PM
I've now watched the 5 O'Clock News and it confirms the impression I've had since we began this invasion of Libya. The Libyan rebels are waiting for NATO planes to destroy Gaddafi's troops and then are moving in to mop up afterwards.

Now, this is a far cry from simply imposing a "no-fly zone" that was initially declared to be the sole objective and it's tantamount to fighting alongside the rebels, albeit not actually with them down on the ground.

Zimobog
Monday, March 28th, 2011, 06:02 PM
Meanwhile in the USA, on the left-wing media Obama will take to the stage tonight to try and convince his disappointed followers that this is not a new war and that this is not a military action. The right-wing media outlets have begun to point to Europe as the real culprits in the Lybian "war for oil" and going out of the way to show France and the EU as bullies who are dragging the peaceful USA into a war so the EU (France in particular) can have more oil.

Permafrost
Monday, March 28th, 2011, 07:16 PM
French Plans to Topple Gaddafi on Track Since Last November (http://www.voltairenet.org/article169069.html)

I've just made a new thread with that article, but I realise that it may have more importance here.

Caledonian
Tuesday, March 29th, 2011, 02:21 PM
http://img848.imageshack.us/img848/6825/10558998.jpg

Caledonian
Tuesday, March 29th, 2011, 02:26 PM
As Roy Batty and a couple of others here have stated the route of Libya is now going to be one of complete NATO invasion with a sort of duplicated action of the likes that happened in the Kosovo - Serbian conflict.

hUXEiwJiKj4

Roderic
Tuesday, March 29th, 2011, 03:07 PM
http://img848.imageshack.us/img848/6825/10558998.jpg

Doesn't matter if it costs millions of tax payer dollars, they need to save the investments of the big companys that bribe our corrupt politicians.

It is all about the money.

http://media.mcclatchydc.com/smedia/2011/02/24/21/20110224_LIBYA_oil.large.prod_affiliate. 91.jpg

Caledonian
Tuesday, March 29th, 2011, 03:08 PM
Tony Cartalucci
Infowars.com
March 28, 2011




It is a test that the international community has to pass. Failure would shake further the faith of the people’s region in the emerging international order and the primacy of international law.”
–Brookings Institute’s “Libya’s Test of the New International Order,” February 2011.

The media expects you to believe placard waving peaceful demonstrators have somehow, in just days, transitioned into tank driving, jet flying rebel forces – just like in Hollywood. Photo: BRQ Network.

While a parade of politicians and pundits cite the “international community,” the UN, and the “Arab street” as giving them the justification to not only wage illegal war on Libya, but to threaten illegal war against Syria as well, it should be remembered that it was neither the UN nor the “international community” that laid the ground work for this campaign.

What started out, supposedly, as spontaneous, simultaneous uprisings across the Middle East, has transformed clearly into an aggressive Western-backed blitzkrieg of destabilization and regime change. This was a plan that was years in the making, talked about in 2007 by then, presidential hopeful, CFR member, and International Crisis Group trustee Wesley Clark.

As hard as our “leadership” tries to act surprised, the current Middle Eastern conflagration has been years in the making.

We now know that the protesters from Tunisia to Egypt had been trained by US created and funded CANVAS of Serbia. We have learned that the US State Department openly admits to providing funding to tech firms to assist protesters across the Middle East and Northern Africa to circumvent cyber-security inside target nations. Perhaps most alarming of all, we now know that the US State Department is also funding corporations like BBC to undermine the governments of China and Iran, revealing the full-scope of their ambitions.

The “international community” that feckless stooges like Joe Lieberman talk about, or his French equal in impotency, Nicolas Sarkozy’s “new post-UNSC 1973 model of world governance” are concepts not born of these “elected representatives,” but rather the product of the corporate think-tanks that hand them their talking points. It is the corporate-financier oligarchy that constitutes the “international community” and who aspires to rule through “world governance.” Their goal is to eliminate national sovereignty and assert their agenda and the laws & regulations to achieve it homogeneously across all national borders.

To see who Lieberman and Sarkozy are channeling, we look to the Brookings Institute report “Libya’s Test of the New International Order” back in February 2011. In it, it talks about the primacy of international law over national sovereignty and considered it being at stake in Libya. Allowing Libya to defy the “international community,” they worried, could ultimately threaten its “resolve and credibility.”

Another telling Brookings Institute report, “Bifurcating the Middle East,” mentions rallying “the Arab street” to confront defiant states like Libya, Syria, and Iran, all of which are mentioned by name. Nowhere was oil mentioned, nor the tremendous profits defense contractors would surely reap, and while these are primary motivators to garner support for the regional campaign within the corporate combine, they are by no means the primary motivators for the campaign itself. The final goal is world government, the elimination of borders, and a monopolistic corporate-financier cartel that can systematically eliminate all challenges to its hegemony – in other words, the dream of all oligarchs since the beginning of time.

In Syria, resistance to the Western-backed opposition is a similar direct challenge to the corporate-financier oligarchs. Nations like Syria, Iran, Libya, Burma, Belarus, and many others are demonized and systematically isolated and undermined not because they are a threat to the world, but because their independence and refusal to acquiesce is an obstacle before a corporate-financier ruled world government.

We are given childish explanations that prey on the most ignorant and feeble of minds as to why we are fighting in Libya, and why we are threatening war with Syria and Iran. Nowhere in Lieberman or Sarkozy’s ranting statements is talk of who these rebels are; that they’ve been fighting on and off against Qaddafi for nearly three decades with US help, that their opposition is based in London and the United States, and that they have overt ties to Al-Qaeda, with rebel leaders themselves openly admitting their affiliations to the terrorist group. We are now told that recently returning to Libya to lead the rebels is Khalifa Hifter, who has spent the last 20 years in “suburban Virginia,” and has spent his time in America lending support to anti-Qaddafi groups.

After fighting a decade in Afghanistan and Iraq at the cost of nearly 6,000 US lives, supposedly to stop the ubiquitous “Al Qaeda,” an organization the US itself created in the mountains of Afghanistan in the 1980′s to fight the Soviets, we have come full circle, with CIA/Al-Qaeda assets fighting side-by-side in Libya, complete with US air support.

Do regular folks forget that Syria was mentioned as part of George Bush’s “Axis of Evil” and that Obama is merely carrying on a continuous agenda that has transcended administrations up to this very day? Considering the agenda revealed by Wesley Clark in 2007, we see how seamlessly “Obama’s war” against Libya fits in. If we are to believe Obama and Bush are ideological opposites, what other explanation can be given as to why this agenda, scorned by the political left under Bush, has now found a new home in Obama’s administration?

Quite clearly politics in America is but a mere illusion. So to is the “War on Terror,” as the US helps Al-Qaeda sweep westward towards Tripoli. It is all empty rhetoric carrying the agenda of global government forward. Despite losing nearly 6,000 of their brothers in arms, the US military carries on, following orders despite the absolute, overt absurdity of their mission. They are literally providing air support now for the men that helped send their buddies back in pine boxes from Iraq. They do this while the media that lied them into a decade of war now celebrates their enemy, these rebels of Benghazi, as heroes of democracy. Again – we come full circle as the Mujaheddin fighting the Soviets were once “heroes” of the West as well.

None of this makes any sense from the political left or right perspective. None of this makes sense from a West verses “Muslim extremist” perspective. The only perspective from which it makes sense, is if a cartel of corporations has been lying to us all along, saying anything and everything to get us to jump through the appropriate hoops. With their plans becoming bolder, perhaps even desperate, they have begun to mix up their narratives to the extent that they are bombing “Al Qaeda” in Pakistan and giving “Al Qeada” air support in Libya. They are admittedly strafing civilians from the air in Pakistan, but imposing no fly zones on Qaddafi over unverified claims of doing the same.

As the globalists admittedly strafe civilians in Afghanistan and Pakistan, they have lobbied for war with Libya over verified lies of doing the same.

Indeed, this is not a war of America, the UN, NATO, or the European Union. The feckless politicians that pose as our leadership are merely taking orders from the powers that be – the corporate-financier oligarchs. If we are to frustrate these oligarchs, we would be wise to waste little time on their front men and instead get straight to the issue. Boycott these corporations and systematically replace them on a local level. While they wage war to eliminate the nation state, from its borders down to our own individual rights and liberties, we must wage a campaign to undermine and eliminate them, from their crass consumerist networks that infest our towns, to the parasitic monstrosity that is the international banking system which infests this planet.

While they must wage their battle through murder, lies, and deceit, we must wage our battle through constructive pragmatic solutions, ingenuity, hard work, community, and self-sufficiency. This is not a war for Libya – this is a war for world government, that if won by the globalists, means our defeat as well.

http://www.infowars.com/libya-war-for-world-government/

Heinrich Harrer
Tuesday, March 29th, 2011, 11:18 PM
Another article about the arming of the rebels:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1371056/David-Cameron-ready-arm-rebels-air-strikes-continue-Gaddafi-goes.html
Cameron is ready to arm the rebels as air strikes set to continue until Gaddafi goes but war of words rages with Nato on whether move would be legal

- 'The Libyan people cannot reach a new future on their own' (..)
- The war so far has cost the US $550 million

Britain is actively considering arming the Libyan rebels after their leaders pleaded with David Cameron for weapons to beat Colonel Gaddafi.
Members of Libya’s opposition told the Prime Minister yesterday they could defeat the dictator in days if the West beefs up their firepower.
They also demanded that Gaddafi stand trial for his crimes, as diplomats appeared at odds over plans to offer the Libyan dictator safe passage into exile.

Foreign Secretary William Hague and U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton both said arming the rebels would be legal. But Britain and America were pitched into a row with Nato Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen, who said UN Resolution 1973 did not allow the arming of the rebels.

He said Nato was seeking to enforce the arms embargo, not breach it, and added: ‘We are there to protect people, not to arm people.’

But the case for arming the rebels became more pressing yesterday, with Gaddafi’ s forces pushing them back after making advances at the weekend.
Opening a London summit on Libya, Mr Cameron said Colonel Gaddafi was ‘in flagrant breach’ of UN resolutions. ‘People in Misrata continue to suffer murderous attacks from the regime,’ he said.

‘Gaddafi is using snipers to shoot people down and let them bleed to death in the street. He has cut off food, water and electricity to starve people into submission.’

UK Government lawyers have given the green light for arms drops to the opposition forces.

The move could lead to a dramatic escalation of Britain’s involvement in the Libyan conflict.

It could see the UK supply heavy machine guns as well as shoulder-launched anti-tank weapons to destroy Gaddafi’s armoured vehicles.
Another row is brewing over the fate of Colonel Gaddafi.

So much for just imposing a no-fly-zone.

NATO’S top commander in Europe warned that ‘flickers’ of Al Qaeda have been found among the Libyan rebels – raising doubts about whether Britain should openly back those fighting to oust Gaddafi.

Admiral James Stavridis, Nato’s Supreme Allied Commander, told a Senate hearing in Washington that intelligence assessments have picked up evidence of militants joining the fight against Gaddafi.

He said devotees of Osama Bin Laden and the Iranian-backed terror group Hezbollah have both been detected in the rebel forces based in Benghazi.
‘We have seen flickers in the intelligence of potential Al Qaeda, Hezbollah, we’ve seen different things,’ Admiral Stavridis said.

Another 'surprise', and I thought we were just told this was all just Gaddhafi propaganda.

http://i.imgur.com/pz4w5.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/49Egq.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/VinfT.jpg

Godwinson
Tuesday, March 29th, 2011, 11:57 PM
There's a good article on the Alex Jones website, full of satire and entitled;

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

Here's a link ... http://www.prisonplanet.com/wow-that-was-fast-libyan-rebels-have-already-established-a-new-central-bank-of-libya.html

Caledonian
Wednesday, March 30th, 2011, 05:22 AM
There's a good article on the Alex Jones website, full of satire and entitled;

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

Here's a link ... http://www.prisonplanet.com/wow-that-was-fast-libyan-rebels-have-already-established-a-new-central-bank-of-libya.html

There is a reason for that. If you remember when Egypt was at the height of the riots about a month ago the international monetary fund said that it wanted to step in upon the toppled government in order to give financial aid.

If I was a betting man I would say the new central bank of Libya has IMF's finger prints all over it.

This is also the same IMF organization that is on the bandwagon of estabilishing a one world currency.

Heinrich Harrer
Wednesday, March 30th, 2011, 05:25 AM
Looks like Sweden also wants to participate now:
http://www.thelocal.se/32886/20110329/

Government yes to Gripen deployment

The Swedish government has given the green light to sending JAS Gripen fighters to Libya following a request from the NATO general secretary, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, for Swedish assistance.

During an extra meeting Tuesday the government decided to propose to the Riksdag that Sweden contribute to the NATO led military attack on Libya.

"The government has decided today ... to put to parliament the proposal to participate with JAS Gripen (jets) in the international military operation in Libya under the leadership of NATO," Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt said in parliament on Tuesday. (..)

The government proposes to deploy the aircraft initially for three months. The cost to Sweden is not to exceed 200 million kronor ($31 million).

"Sweden must take its responsibility when our fellow human beings are threatened," Reinfeldt said.

Sweden is not a member of NATO, although it has been in NATO's Partnership for Peace programme since 1994 and participates in the alliance's International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) force in Afghanistan with some 500 troops.


'Partnership for Peace programme' - what a nice label for bombing reluctant countries like Libya into the ground. :D

A poll published last week showed some 65 percent of Swedes wanted their
country to take part in the mission in Libya.

And it seems like the swedish media also did its job well.

Caledonian
Wednesday, March 30th, 2011, 05:31 AM
On Saturday, McClatchy reported that Khalifa Hifter, a former Gaddafi military officer, was appointed to lead the rebel army supported by the United Nations, the United States and the Globalist Coalition.

The rebels, portrayed as heroic by the corporate media, are run by the CIA and the globalists. Photo: BRQ Network.

Hifter spent two decades living in suburban Virginia “where he established a life but maintained ties to anti-Gaddafi groups,” writes Chris Adams for the newspaper. A friend told the journalist he “was unsure exactly what Hifter did to support himself, and that Hifter primarily focused on helping his large family.”

As it turns out, Mr. Hifter is a CIA operative, which likely explains his lengthy stay in Virginia. In 1996, the Washington Post reported that a Col. Haftar (a variation on Hifter) had arrived in the United States and he was “reported to be the leader of a contra-style group based in the U.S. called the Libyan National Army,” the Wisdom Fund noted at the time. “This group is supported by the U.S., and has been given training facilities in the U.S. It’s a good presumption that Col. Haftar’s group operates in Libya with the blessings of our government.”

In 2001, Le Monde diplomatique published a book entitled Manipulations africaines stating that Hifter, then a colonel in Gaddafi’s army, was captured while fighting in Chad in a Libyan-backed rebellion against the US-supported government of Hissène Habré. “He defected to the Libyan National Salvation Front (LNSF), the principal anti-Gaddafi group, which had the backing of the American CIA. He organized his own militia, which operated in Chad until Habré was overthrown by a French-supported rival, Idriss Déby, in 1990,” writes Patrick Martin.

Chad served as a base of operations to destabilize Libya, according to Paris-based African Confidential newsletter. It reported on January 5th, 1989, that “the US and Israel had set up a series of bases in Chad and other neighboring countries to train 2000 Libyan rebels captured by the Chad army,” writes author Peter Dale Scott.

In The Secret War Against Libya, Richard Keeble writes for MediaLens:

US official records indicate that funding for the Chad-based secret war against Libya also came from Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Morocco, Israel and Iraq. The Saudis, for instance, donated $7m to an opposition group, the National Front for the Salvation of Libya (also backed by French intelligence and the CIA). But a plan to assassinate Gaddafi and take over the government on 8 May 1984 was crushed. In the following year, the US asked Egypt to invade Libya and overthrow Gaddafi but President Mubarak refused. By the end of 1985, the Washington Post had exposed the plan after congressional leaders opposing it wrote in protest to President Reagan

Hidden in plain view is the fact the CIA and the establishment have appointed a former operative to run the so-called rebel army posed against Gaddafi. In other words, the resistance daily portrayed as heroes by the corporate media – itself controlled by the CIA and the establishment – basically consists of the same folks who opposed the Libyan dictator two decades ago.

The other CIA front in Libya is al-Qaeda under the banner of al-Jama’a al-Islamiyyah al-Muqatilah bi-Libya, aka the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, LIFG. The LIFG was founded in 1995 by a group of mujahideen veterans who had fought against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. The mujahideen operation was run by the CIA, Pakistan’s ISI, and the Saudis. It eventually became al-Qaeda, the Taliban, and assorted jihadists.

Meanwhile, over at the Soros operation, Think Progress, the libs are desperate to support Obama’s murderous new war and dismiss anybody who would even suggest the heroic rebels are connected to al-Qaeda and the CIA.

Stock up with Fresh Food that lasts with eFoodsDirect (Ad)

“It’s necessary to have a public debate about the U.S. role in Libya, but it’s important to get the facts right — al Qaeda is not driving the Libyan resistance,” the foundation and globalist liberals insist.

They are right, but not in the way they think. The CIA is the driving force and al-Qaeda is just window dressing consisting of the usual dupes, patsies, useful idiots, and assorted psychopaths on the payroll.





http://www.infowars.com/cia-operative-appointed-to-run-al-qaeda-connected-libyan-rebels/

Caledonian
Wednesday, March 30th, 2011, 07:10 AM
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-LoYfGvoXgxo/TZHhZL2xSBI/AAAAAAAAH4s/UcdWFEFf6zY/s1600/dees+libya.jpg

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-HKl92EyG6S4/TY_x-ObPIkI/AAAAAAAAH2Q/WO9cnLq2ax4/s1600/Dees+-+Bush+passing+the+Afghan+poppy+ball+to+O bama.jpg

velvet
Wednesday, March 30th, 2011, 11:43 AM
Now German MSM, tv station N-TV reports that an US General assumes that Al-Qaida is among the rebels, and yet the Libya Conferrence still checks whether the resolution could be interpreted to include weapon supply for the rebel troups. Mainly France wants this, backed though also by Hillary Clinton and others, while the Nato-chief Rasmussen tries to return to negotiations and wants a political solution.


Gaddafi doesnt back down though, and his troups managed to win back his city of birth Sirte and Las Ranuf, and obviously push back the rebels more to the east again.

Go Gaddafi :thumbup

Haliaeetus
Wednesday, March 30th, 2011, 11:49 AM
I read in the newspaper today that support of Sarkozy in France went down heavily since this all started and that on the other hand french nationalist gained more popularity. :thumbup

Enkidu
Wednesday, March 30th, 2011, 12:04 PM
I hope it very much that Kadhafi will survive and push back the rebels more to the eat again.

Fortune favours the brave !

Caledonian
Friday, April 1st, 2011, 02:33 PM
Arming Libya rebels not allowed by UN resolutions, legal experts warn USWashington questioned over its assertion that UN mandate permits supply of arms to anti-Gaddafi rebels

The US is likely to be in breach of the UN security council's arms embargo on Libya if it sends weapons to the rebels, experts in international law have warned.

After Hillary Clinton said it would be legal to send arms to support the uprising, lawyers analysing the terms of the UN's 26 February arms embargo said it would require a change in the terms for it not to breach international law.

"The embargo appears to cover everybody in the conflict which means you can't supply arms to rebels," said Philippe Sands QC, professor of international law at University College London.

His view was backed by other experts in international law who said they could not see how the US could legally justify sending arms into Libya under the current resolutions.

Clinton told a press conference in London on Tuesday that this month's UN security council resolution creating a no-fly zone and allowing strikes to protect civilians effectively amended or overrode the absolute prohibition on arms to anyone in Libya, "so that there could be a legitimate transfer of arms if a country should choose to do that".

Asked whether the US itself would arm Libya revolutionaries, Susan Rice, the US ambassador to the UN, said: "We have not made that decision but we've not certainly ruled that out."

February's UN security council resolution 1970 on the arms embargo states that all member states must prevent the supply to the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya – the Libyan nation – of arms including weapons and ammunition, military vehicles and equipment, paramilitary equipment and spare parts. The embargo also relates to the provision of technical assistance, training or financial and bans the provision of mercenaries.

It includes an exemption for "other sales or supply of arms and related material, or provision of assistance or personnel, as approved in advance by the committee". The committee was established to oversee the implementation of the embargo and is chaired by José Filipe Moraes Cabral, Portugal's ambassador to the UN.

Professor Nicholas Grief, director of legal studies at the University of Kent, said that to him the 17 March resolution in fact appeared to strengthen the arms embargo by calling for its "strict implementation" by member states.

"I don't see how they can say that reading them together means they can circumvent the arms embargo," he said. "The resolution makes clear it is for the security council to decide whether to strengthen, suspend or lift the arms embargo, not for member states to act unilaterally."

On Monday, the Nato secretary general, Anders Fogh Rasumussen, stressed the importance of respecting the arms embargo. "The UN mandate authorises the enforcement of an arms embargo," he said. "We are not in Libya to arm people but to protect people."

A leading expert on UN law who has advised the British government and asked not to be named said: "The attempt to take the two resolutions together to justify arming the rebels looks like an imaginative interpretation by the US. I don't think the security council had the rebels in mind when it passed the resolution. I would be interested to see what the US argument is in detail."

"The idea of the arms embargo resolution is to limit the supply of arms to both sides, as similar UN embargoes covering Iraq and Haiti have done."

A senior state department official confirmed the US government believed that combined, the 26 February arms embargo and the 17 March security council resolution "give us the flexibility necessary should that decision be taken [to arm the rebellion]".

"Taken together the two resolutions don't preclude the provision of arms to the rebels," the official said.


http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/mar/30/arming-libya-rebels-america-warned

Also, what's the deal with Al Qaeda?

First they are our friends in the 1980's against Russia, then they become our eternal international terrorist enemy through 9/11 amid the Iraq and Afghanistan wars as well where now they are helping us against Libya where we knowingly seek to arm them as rebel allies..........

What the hell is going on here?

Could it be that this entire war on terror was fabricated from the start?

Could it be that our entire reality through civilization and government is nothing more than that which is built upon giant malicious deception?

Roderic
Friday, April 1st, 2011, 05:37 PM
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/mar/30/arming-libya-rebels-america-warned

Also, what's the deal with Al Qaeda?

First they are our friends in the 1980's against Russia, then they become our eternal international terrorist enemy through 9/11 amid the Iraq and Afghanistan wars as well where now they are helping us against Libya where we knowingly seek to arm them as rebel allies..........

What the hell is going on here?

Could it be that this entire war on terror was fabricated from the start?

Could it be that our entire reality through civilization and government is nothing more than that which is built upon giant malicious deception?

Top Ranking CIA Operatives Admit Al-qaeda Is a Complete Fabrication

http://polidics.com/cia/top-ranking-cia-operatives-admit-al-qaeda-is-a-complete-fabrication.html

http://www.alqaedadoesntexist.com/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ek7ZHenQnu4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VnV_pNe_BB0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kZtbYnslB0o

mztfFdpd1Rk

dark mind
Friday, April 1st, 2011, 07:55 PM
I don't think it's too wise to demolish a socialist (?) dictator only to maybe establish a Islamic regime.

I think there are worse regimes than Gaddafis', e.g. Saudi Arabia, North Korea; there have been genocides in other world's regions e.g. Sudan (not that there is a genocide in Libya) where nothing was done.

I have no sympathy for Gaddafi but he might be the lesser evil, I think this military action is obviously for selfish reasons and not humanitary ones, though after all western civilisation might profit I consider it to be immoral and wrong to intervene, the Arabs have to deal with this issue by themselves, it is not an European issue.

Considering there are Al Kaida and Hamas forces figthing alongside western air forces against Gaddafi it fits into a greater image.

The anti-Gaddafi insurgents look everything else than trustworthy and are by no means innocent civilians, you'll find interesting pictures there (http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?195079-Libyan-Conflict-Photos-and-Videos) (militaryphotos.net) in case you're interested.

Haliaeetus
Friday, April 1st, 2011, 08:54 PM
I have no sympathy for Gaddafi but he might be the lesser evil, I think this military action is obviously for selfish reasons and not humanitary ones, though after all western civilisation might profit I consider it to be immoral and wrong to intervene, the Arabs have to deal with this issue by themselves, it is not an European issue.

Considering there are Al Kaida and Hamas forces figthing alongside western air forces against Gaddafi it fits into a greater image.

The anti-Gaddafi insurgents look everything else than trustworthy and are by no means innocent civilians, you'll find interesting pictures there (http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?195079-Libyan-Conflict-Photos-and-Videos) (militaryphotos.net) in case you're interested.

Of course not for humanitarian. If anyone wanted to go for that they'd be intervening in Ivory Cost not Libya.

As for the old-new friendship with the imaginary terrorist Al-Kaida I will not make any worthy comment, will just say that all that is way too disgusting for my taste. Next thing we'll hear is NATO in alliance with the Somali pirates against the terrorist penguins of Antarctica. :D

dark mind
Saturday, April 2nd, 2011, 08:24 AM
I know it is not the actual topic but does anybody have an idea how German BGS Sumpftarn camouflage (swamp camo) got to Libya?

http://img854.imageshack.us/img854/9093/800xk.jpg

this dudes look kind of surreal, somehow fascinating

Haliaeetus
Saturday, April 2nd, 2011, 11:32 AM
I know it is not the actual topic but does anybody have an idea how German BGS Sumpftarn camouflage (swamp camo) got to Libya?


The same way Serbian uniforms got to Albanian terrorists in the 90's. :)
Companies making money by supplying both sides. Nobody cares about these things but it's actually kind of sick when you supply with equipment a group of people who use it to kill your people.

Myrddin
Saturday, April 2nd, 2011, 09:11 PM
David Cameron isn't a jew, Barack Obama is not a jew - sure it is important to point out jewish power but this thread took a wrong turn somewhere. The supreme power is not the King, but rather those who whisper in the King's ear. It is much like the Middle Ages, yet more so.

Beware the Moor, but remember who gave the Moor the keys to the city. It is very much the same today, yet the key-givers' power is even more consolidated and unquestioned.

Ylva
Sunday, April 3rd, 2011, 01:41 PM
Libya's unknown water sources

By Henrik Pihlström March 21, 2011

Libya has not only oil but also enormous sources of water stored in the desert, so-called "fossil water". Libya has in a unique project been able to transport water through pipelines to irrigation systems and towns. This progress has been fully left out in the propaganda against the present regime in the country.

http://www.patriot.nu/bilder/artiklar/20110321_vatten.jpg

If the optimistic calculations are correct, this water project can see to that millions of people for decades to come can live well without having to starve. It gives Libya and its neighbors the opportunity to develop in stable, peaceful conditions. The main "culprit" who worked for this development is Muammar Gaddafi. Something that should be weighed against the ongoing propaganda against him.

Deep in the Sahara desert in the 1950s, large underground water reserves was discovered, known as aquifers, in connection with drilling for oil. The water was gathered in the ground thousands of years ago. The water can be estimated to correspond to a total of 35 000 cubic kilometers of water from four different aquifers with dept of 2000 meters below ground level. This amount of water has been compared to the flow of water that runs through the Nile River during 200 years.

http://www.patriot.nu/bilder/artiklar/20110321_karta.jpg

In the 1980s, Gaddafi launched the project GMR (Great Man-made ​​River) Water Supply Project. The GMR project was divided into five phases with a gradual expansion. The water system consists partly of pipelines for water with a width of sometimes four meters in diameter. The water moves from the desert to the country's heavily populated coastal regions. The system is designed to pump water from more than 1,000 desert wells and has a capacity to move 6.5 million cubic meters each day. Many Libyan households get their tap water from the fossil water. The GMR project has been called "the world's largest technology venture" and "the world's eighth wonder".

http://www.patriot.nu/bilder/artiklar/20110321_pipeline.jpg

Libya is composed of more than 90 percent desert. Imports of fresh water or to produce fresh water by for example evaporation of sea water are expensive and unrealistic options for covering up the need for water. The fossil water however, enables even the agricultural opportunities in a large scale. Through irrigation systems Libya strives to produce food for its population and likely even the neighboring countries. The GMR project will enable 155 000 hectares of arable land.

http://www.patriot.nu/bilder/artiklar/20110321_pumpstation.jpg

The water project has cost much money for Libya (27 billion dollars according to estimates from 2004). These are fully funded by the country's own oil revenues. No third-party lenders or speculators have dictated the conditions which means ​​that Libya had great potential to develope independently for a long time to come.


http://www.patriot.nu/artikel.asp?artikelID=1711

Leonhardt
Sunday, April 3rd, 2011, 01:45 PM
Roberts talks about US hegemony around the world, but I think the US military is just doing the work for the international bankers, like Smedley Butler said in War is a Racket.
Ironic, isn’t it, while Washington and its NATO puppets are busy occupying the world, they are being occupied by the world.

-Paul Craig Roberts
http://www.counterpunch.com/roberts04012011.html

velvet
Sunday, April 3rd, 2011, 02:29 PM
No third-party lenders or speculators have dictated the conditions which means ​​that Libya had great potential to develope independently for a long time to come.

http://www.patriot.nu/artikel.asp?artikelID=1711

Thanks for digging this out! :thumbup

Maybe that's the little detail at the center of the hot spot all politicians talk so nicely around.

Caledonian
Monday, April 4th, 2011, 03:06 PM
jZBIlRZsvgc


0fUxVgxj0vc

And so the real goal of the Libyan “No Fly Zone” succeeds: Reuters reports that the Libyan rebel alliance, which already has its own central bank and supposedly fiat printing machines, is about to sell its first oil cargo in the coming week.”The agency said Liberian-registered tanker Equator was due to arrive in the rebel-held eastern Libyan port of Tobruk on Monday to load a cargo of Serir/Mesla blend crude oil. The agency quoted Wahid Bougaighis, head of the newly established oil company, as saying: “They are coming for sure because there was a contract signed already.”" It remains to be seen how K-Daf feels about honoring contracts signed by insurgents. In the meantime, the chocolate lovers lobby is finally stirring about imposing a comparable No Fly Zone in Ivory Coast. You know, for human rights violations.

From Reuters:

Libyan rebels will this week load the first tanker with crude since an uprising against leader Muammar Gaddafi fully suspended exports from the North African country, Platts news agency reported on Monday.

The agency said Liberian-registered tanker Equator was due to arrive in the rebel-held eastern Libyan port of Tobruk on Monday to load a cargo of Serir/Mesla blend crude oil.

The agency quoted Wahid Bougaighis, head of the newly established oil company, as saying: “They are coming for sure because there was a contract signed already.”

He gave no other details. Reuters could not reach Bougaighis for comment.

The rebel-led government has said it has concluded a deal with Qatar to market crude oil

The rebel movement has also said it is discussing plans to exempt its oil exports from sanctions and has also raised the issue with a U.N. envoy

http://www.infowars.com/no-fly-zone-succeeds-libyan-rebels-to-sell-first-oil-cargo/


dDVt_hSo_EU

Caledonian
Friday, April 8th, 2011, 07:15 AM
So I have been observing the situation of our government for some time now in the last couple of years since the 2008 economical crisis to the present growing economical crisis that is looming now all around us where I've come to the conclusion that the United States government is essentially trying to mimic what happened during the the first depression by achieving economical profitability by that of war like the United States did during world war II.

The profit of war industry is huge not to mention it creates alot of jobs within any nation at a state of war which is exactly what happened in the first depression where economical ruin was avoided by entering world war II.

This time around world war III is a middle eastern world war of Iraq, Afghanistan, and now Libya where the strategy of the United States to avoid economical ruin is pretty much the same as it was in world war II.

[Is Iran, Yemen, Bahrain, Sudan,Syria, and Somalia next?]


[I think we can pretty much sum all this recent war activity as world war III considering that a entire region of the world known as the middle east is for all intents and purposes being invaded. Let's not also forget Lebanon with Israel in that mix either here very recently.]

However it get's even better with the link below...........



General: U.S. may consider troops in Libya
Army Gen. Carter Ham says ground forces wouldn't be ideal, but may be a possible way to aid rebels; Says current operation largely stalemated

(CBS/AP) WASHINGTON - The United States may consider sending troops into Libya with a possible international ground force that could aid the rebels, according to the general who led the military mission until NATO took over.


Army Gen. Carter Ham also told lawmakers Thursday that added American participation would not be ideal, and ground troops could erode the international coalition and make it more difficult to get Arab support for operations in Libya.


Ham said the operation was largely stalemated now and was more likely to remain that way since America has transferred control to NATO.


Complete coverage: Anger in the Arab World


He said NATO has done an effective job in an increasingly complex combat situation. But he noted that, in a new tactic, Muammar Qaddafi's forces are making airstrikes more difficult by staging military forces and vehicles near civilian areas such as schools and mosques.


The use of an international ground force is a possible plan to bolster rebels fighting forces loyal to the Libyan leader, Ham said at a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing.


Asked if the U.S. would provide troops, Ham said, "I suspect there might be some consideration of that. My personal view at this point would be that that's probably not the ideal circumstance, again for the regional reaction that having American boots on the ground would entail."


Video: Ex-Rep. Weldon on Libya visit, Qaddafi meeting


President Barack Obama has said repeatedly there will be no U.S. troops on the ground in Libya, although there are reports of small CIA teams in the country. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates told lawmakers last week that there would be no American ground troops in Libya "as long as I am in this job."


Ham disclosed that the United States is providing some strike aircraft to the NATO operation that do not need to go through the special approval process recently established. The powerful side-firing AC-130 gunship is available to NATO commanders, he said.


Other strike aircraft, including fighters and the A-10 Thunderbolt, which can provide close air support for ground forces, must be requested through U.S. European Command and approved by top U.S. leaders, including Defense Secretary Robert Gates. Ham said that process is quick, and other defense officials have said it can take about a day for the U.S. to approve the request and move the aircraft in from bases in Europe.


Ham said recent bad weather and threats from Qaddafi's mobile surface-to-air missile systems hampered efforts to use aircraft like the AC-130 and the A-10 to provide close air support for friendly ground forces. He says those conditions contributed to the stalemate.


Since the U.S. handed off the strike mission to NATO, U.S. planes account for only 15 percent of NATO planes now doing those air attacks, Ham said.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/04/07/501364/main20051760.shtml#ixzz1IrtMwlxl




Nta_tm_dk4g

Heinrich Harrer
Friday, April 8th, 2011, 08:18 AM
Germany might soon be involved too:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-04-08/german-army-may-give-humanitarian-help-in-libya-rundschau-says.html
German Army May Give Humanitarian Help in Libya, Rundschau Says

Germany’s army may participate in a humanitarian aid mission in Libya, Frankfurter Rundschau reported, citing unidentified government officials.

The assistance might mean that the 990 German soldiers who are part of the European Union’s battle group may be deployed to the North African country, the newspaper said.

German Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle said yesterday that Germany won’t abandon its responsibilities if a request is made by the United Nations to the European Union for assistance in Libya, Rundschau reported.

velvet
Friday, April 8th, 2011, 12:11 PM
German Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle said yesterday that Germany won’t abandon its responsibilities if a request is made by the United Nations to the European Union for assistance in Libya, Rundschau reported.

This "aid mission", according to what Westerwelle said, will be for aid in transporting "refugees" (inhabitans of the cities most affected by the NATO organised and supported civil war by terrorists, like those of Basra, Misrata and the other rebel posts) into "safety" (in other words, Europe) :thumbdown

Maybe it would be more wise (not that one could expect this from Westerwelle and his politician-ilk....) not to create refugees in the first place with inciting a civil war.... :mad


But it sort of makes pervert sense when one remembers the EU plans to add 50mio Black Africans to Europe. Probably the people didnt want to come just so and that is the method of the EU commission to move them to want to emigrate from their bombed-out countries............

Caledonian
Friday, April 15th, 2011, 07:25 AM
Can we call latest engagement in the middle east the beginning of world war III?

OPmlUFAXvdU

Heinrich Harrer
Wednesday, April 20th, 2011, 08:30 PM
NATO meddling continues, while there seem to be growing concerns in China, Russia and India:

http://blogs.news.sky.com/foreignmatters/Post:bbb48d71-d1a9-4990-8185-7b928ab82b99
"Britain and France want UN sanctions against Libyan state TV"
China, Russia And India Block Libya Sanctions

The British and French governments want more UN sanctions against Libya but are being blocked by China, Russia and India.

Sky News sources in New York say that among a range of extra measures sought is a proposal to add Libyan state TV to the list of Libyan companies with which it would become illegal to do business. The two governments argue that state TV is aiding the Gaddafi war aims by broadcasting propaganda.

Libyan TV is partially broadcast via satellite companies Arab Sat, Nile Sat and Euro Sat. If it was listed, they could no longer accept payments from Tripoli. That might encourage the companies to consider whether to continue to carry the Libyan TV signal.

China, Russia and India have all called for Nato's bombing campaign against Libya to stop.

Sky News also understands that within Nato, the Americans, British and France are debating with other countries to see if the list of military targets in Libya can be widened.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fgw-libya-military-aid-20110421,0,3835596.story
3 Western powers sending military advisors to Libya

France, Italy and Britain will send officers but do not agree to a rebel request for ground troops. France will intensify airstrikes and says NATO should consider the ground forces.

In the wake of a plea for help from besieged rebels in the Libyan city of Misurata, three Western powers have announced that they will send military advisors and one said Wednesday that it would step up airstrikes against Moammar Kadafi’s military. (..)

In Paris, French President Nicolas Sarkozy said Wednesday that France would intensify its airstrikes at the request of opposition forces.

Libyan rebel chief Mustafa Abdel Jalil met with Sarkozy as Western powers struggle to break a deadlock in the two-month conflict. He had been expected to ask for an increase in NATO airstrikes but also might name officials in Tripoli whom the opposition would be willing to deal with if Kadafi stepped down, a source close to the opposition said.

After the Paris meeting, a presidential aide quoted Sarkozy as saying: "We will intensify the strikes." The aide was not authorized to be publicly named according to presidential policy. (..)

France insisted Wednesday that it is not ready to send ground troops, but said the U.N. Security Council should consider it. (..)


http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/0,1518,758195,00.html
Debatte um Bodentruppen - Auch Frankreich und Italien schicken Militärberater

Die Rebellen in Libyen bitten verzweifelt um Hilfe, fordern Bodentruppen von Frankreich und Großbritannien. Bisher lassen sich beide Staaten nur auf eine Light-Version ein: Nach London hat nun auch Paris zugesagt, den Aufständischen Militärberater zur Seite zu stellen. Italien folgte wenig später.

Die Rebellen in der belagerten Stadt Misurata bitten angesichts der dramatischen Lage um die Entsendung ausländischer Bodentruppen. Doch bisher haben sowohl Frankreich als auch Großbritannien abgesagt - unter Verweis auf das Uno-Mandat, das einen solchen Einsatz nicht abdeckt. Doch London hatte sich bereits am Dienstag verpflichtet, bis zu 20 Militärberater nach Libyen entsenden zu wollen. Sie sollen die gegen Gaddafi kämpfenden Rebellen ausbilden und organisieren. Das Land hat den Rebellen bereits 1000 Splitterschutzwesten und 100 Satellitentelefone zur Verfügung gestellt.

Nun zieht auch Frankreich nach. Am Mittwoch teilte ein Regierungssprecher mit, Paris werde ebenfalls eine "geringe Anzahl" solcher Militärexperten nach Libyen senden. Dabei handele es sich aber nicht um Bodentruppen, sagte der Sprecher. Verteidigungsminister Gérard Longuet sagte, über eine solche Mission müsse der Sicherheitsrat entscheiden. Der libysche Oppositionsführer Mustafa Abdul Dschalil trifft sich am Mittwoch in Paris mit dem französischen Präsidenten Nicolas Sarkozy, um das weitere Vorgehen zu besprechen. Aus dessen Büro hieß es, Frankreich wollte die Luftangriffe auf Gaddafis Truppen verstärken.

Kurz darauf zog die italienische Regierung nach. Auch Rom schickt nun Berater, um die Rebellen zu trainieren. Es würden zehn Experten entsandt, sagte Verteidigungsminister Ignazio La Russa nach einem Gespräch mit seinem britischen Amtskollegen Liam Fox. (..)

Google Translate:
Debate over ground troops - France and Italy sent military advisers

The rebels in Libya ask desperately for help, ask for ground troops from France and Great Britain. So far, both countries have only a light version: After London and Paris now agreed, the rebels put military advisers. Italy followed suit soon after.

The rebels in the besieged city of Misurata ask, given the dramatic situation to the deployment of foreign ground troops. But so far, both France and Britain called off - with reference to the UN mandate does not cover such use. But London had already committed themselves on Tuesday to send up to 20 military advisers want to Libya. They should organize training the fighting against rebels and Gaddafi. The country has already suplied the rebels with ​​1000 flak jackets and 100 satellite phones.

Now moves to France too. On Wednesday said a government spokesman, Paris will also send a "small number" of such military experts to Libya. It constitutes but not ground troops, the spokesman said. Defence Minister Gerard Longuet said, must decide on such a mission, the Security Council. The Libyan opposition leader Mustafa Abdul Jelil meets on Wednesday to discuss in Paris with French President Nicolas Sarkozy, to how to proceed. From whose office it was said that France wished to reinforce its air attacks on Gaddafi's troops.

Shortly after moving to the Italian government. Rome also now sends advisers to train the rebels. It would be sent ten experts, Defence Minister Ignazio La Russa said after talks with his British counterpart, Liam Fox.


I also find it curious that many of the rebels seem to have brand new belgian NATO rifles (first saw a youtube video about it, then it was also mentioned in a Spiegel article).

velvet
Wednesday, April 20th, 2011, 09:37 PM
China, Russia and India have all called for Nato's bombing campaign against Libya to stop.

Yeah, just sad that no one will listen, the British-French Jew-buddies are just too eager to make war.

Renwein
Wednesday, April 20th, 2011, 11:15 PM
Sky News sources in New York say that among a range of extra measures sought is a proposal to add Libyan state TV to the list of Libyan companies with which it would become illegal to do business. The two governments argue that state TV is aiding the Gaddafi war aims by broadcasting propaganda.

the irony is just too fucking funny :rotfl

Caledonian
Thursday, April 21st, 2011, 09:02 AM
X0L1IVQV764

xmTxV5UaIbU

Caledonian
Thursday, April 21st, 2011, 10:22 AM
Bangkok, Thailand April 15, 2011 - As American bombs rain down upon Libya on the premise that Qaddafi was brutalizing indigenous pro-democratic demonstrators, the accusing fingers of Libya, Iran, China, Syria, Belarus, and a growing number of other nations are pointing at Washington for funding and plotting regime change against their respective governments. Either in an act of absolute hubris or to spin emerging evidence that the US indeed has been funding and preparing the ground for the "Arab Spring" for years, New York Times has recently published "U.S. Groups Helped Nurture Arab Uprisings."

Essentially throwing these activists under the bus, New York Times exposes that the April 6 Youth Movement in Egypt, the Bahrain Center for Human Rights, and Entsar Qadhi of Yemen amongst others, received training and financing from the International Republican Institute, the National Democratic Institute, and the Neo-Conservative lined Freedom House.

The New York Times goes on to explain that these organizations are in turn funded by the National Endowment for Democracy which receives 100 million USD from Congress while Freedom House receives most of its money from the US State Department. While the New York Times asserts "no one doubts that the Arab uprisings are home grown," leaders of groups now admittedly funded and trained by the US are anything but "home grown." The most prominent example is the April 6 Movement of Egypt led by Mohamed ElBaradei of the International Crisis Group. ElBaradei sitting along side George Soros, Kenneth Adelman, Wesley Clark, and Zbigniew Brzezinski, within a US foreign policy think-tank engenders a considerable amount of "doubt."

Also conceding involvement is the Project on Middle East Democracy (POMED), chaired by various Council on Foreign Relations and Brookings Institute alumni. POMED claims that they helped protesters develop skills and to network. Such training has taken place annually under Movements.org starting in 2008 where Egypt's April 6 movement among many others, learned techniques to subvert their government. Movements.org of course is sponsored by a conglomerate of corporations and government agencies including the US State Department, Google, MTV, the Edelman public relations firm, Facebook, CBS News, MSNBC, Pepsi, and others. Despite the claim that such meddling is "promoting democracy," looking at the sponsors and war mongering interests involved in this operation, it appears to be more about promoting global military and economic hegemony.


The role of NGOs and the so called "civil society" used to support the unrest is also included in the New York Times piece, as well as the displeasure expressed by Arab leaders berating the US for meddling in their internal affairs. Such accusations have now reach a crescendo with China, Iran, Syria, and Belarus making similar claims.

The New York Times piece ends by describing cables indicating that many activists who became aware of US involvement in funding and directing the movements became disenfranchised. Such activists were "ousted." Training was conducted outside of target countries, including in Jordan, Morocco, Serbia, and the United States. What the New York Times omits are the similar connections and involvements corporate special interests hand in steering human rights organizations in support of these operations as well. Such organizations had amply laid the rhetorical groundwork needed to justify the ever expanding war in Libya.

Of course, one needs only remember the feigned ignorance exhibited by the US State Department, Hillary Clinton, and Barack Obama, along with the litany of lies purveyed by the mainstream media to see a disingenuous plot in motion. This is because everyone from the US State Department and the corporate owned media had been involved, for years, preparing to bring the "Arab Spring" to fruition. With open admissions now being made by a global corporate-financier mouthpiece like the New York Times, one must consider the serious implications of what may come next.


http://www.activistpost.com/2011/04/its-official-arab-spring-subversion-is.html

RoyBatty
Thursday, April 21st, 2011, 05:05 PM
Great post Caledonian. No prizes for guessing who's behind the Arab world "uprisings" or the recent subway bombing in Belarus. ZOG is really chomping at the bit atm.

Heinrich Harrer
Thursday, April 21st, 2011, 10:58 PM
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/apr/21/obama-oks-use-armed-drones-libya/
Obama OKs use of armed drones in Libya

President Obama has approved the use of armed drones in Libya, authorizing U.S. airstrikes on ground forces for the first time since America turned over control of the operation to NATO on April 4.

It also is the first time that drones will be used for airstrikes since the conflict began on March 19, although they have routinely been flying surveillance missions, Defense Secretary Robert Gates told reporters at a Pentagon briefing Thursday.

He said the U.S. will provide up to two 24-hour combat air patrols each day by the unmanned Predators.

Marine Gen. James Cartwright, vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said the drones can help counteract the pro-Gadhafi forces’ tactic of traveling in civilian vehicles that make it difficult to distinguish them from rebel forces.

“What they will bring that is unique to the conflict is their ability to get down lower, therefore to be able to get better visibility on targets that have started to dig themselves into defensive positions,” Cartwright said. “They are uniquely suited for urban areas.” (..)

By the way, are they still using these drones regularly in Pakistan for bombing people?

RoyBatty
Friday, April 22nd, 2011, 07:56 PM
By the way, are they still using these drones regularly in Pakistan for bombing people?

Of course they are

Caledonian
Saturday, April 23rd, 2011, 07:04 AM
Libya: Qaddafi arms his civilian supporters


TRIPOLI - The embattled Libyan regime passed out guns to civilian supporters, set up checkpoints Saturday and sent armed patrols roving the terrorized capital to try to maintain control of Muammar Qaddafi's stronghold and quash dissent as rebels consolidate control elsewhere in the North African nation.


Residents of its eastern Tajoura district spread concrete blocks, large rocks and even chopped-down palm trees as makeshift barricades to prevent the SUVs filled with young men wielding automatic weapons from entering their neighborhood — a hotspot of previous protests.


With tensions running high in Tripoli, scores of people in the neighborhood turned out at a funeral for a 44-year-old man killed in clashes with pro-regime forces. Anwar Algadi was killed Friday, with the cause of death listed as "a live bullet to the head," according to his brother, Mohammed.


Armed men in green armbands, along with uniformed security forces check those trying to enter the district, where graffiti that says "Qaddafi, you Jew," "Down to the dog," and "Tajoura is free" was scrawled on walls.


Outside the capital, rebels held a long swath of about half of Libya's 1,000-mile Mediterranean coastline where most of the population lives, and even captured a brigadier general and a soldier Saturday as the Libyan army tried to retake an air base east of Tripoli. The state-run news agency also said the opposition held an air defense commander and several other officers.


The reports came a day after protesters demanding Qaddafi's ouster came under a hail of bullets when pro-regime militiamen opened fire to stop the first significant anti-government marches in days in the Libyan capital.


The Libyan leader, speaking from the ramparts of a historic Tripoli fort, told supporters to prepare to defend the nation as he faced the biggest challenge to his 42-year rule, with rebels having seized control of about half of the country's coastline.


"At the suitable time, we will open the arms depot so all Libyans and tribes become armed, so that Libya becomes red with fire," Qaddafi said.


The international community stepped up its response to the bloodshed, while Americans and other foreigners were evacuated from the chaos roiling the North African nation.


Some estimates indicate more than 1,000 people have been killed in less than two weeks since the revolution began.


Complete coverage: Anger in the Arab world


The U.N. Security Council began deliberations Saturday to consider an arms embargo against the Libyan government and a travel ban and asset freeze against Qaddafi, his relatives and key members of his government.


President Barack Obama signed an executive order Friday freezing assets held by Qaddafi and four of his children in the United States. The Treasury Department said the sanctions against Qaddafi, three of his sons and a daughter also apply to the Libyan government.


"Although there are those who doubt that sanctions can have an immediate impact, they send a strong message to those still around the Libyan leader that the international wagons are circling and that time and history are against his remaining in power," said CBS News foreign affairs analyst Pamela Falk.


A U.N. Security Council Resolution, combined with the condemnation and inquiry by the U.N. Human Rights Council in Geneva and a likely vote next week by the U.N. General Assembly to suspend Libya, Falk added, sends a unified message that Qaddafi has nowhere to turn.


In Tripoli, most residents remained in their homes Saturday, terrified of bands of armed men running checkpoints and patrolling the city.


A 40-year-old business owner said he had seen Qaddafi supporters enter one of the regime's Revolutionary Committee headquarters Saturday and leave with arms.


He said the regime is offering a car and money to any supporters bringing three people with them to join the effort.


"Someone from the old revolutionary committees will go with them so they'll be four," the witness said when reached by telephone from Cairo. "They'll arm them to drive around the city and terrorize people."


Other residents reported seeing trucks full of civilians with automatic rifles patrolling their neighborhoods. Many of the men are young, even teenagers, and wear green arm bands or cloths on their heads to show their affiliation to the regime, residents said. All spoke on condition of anonymity for fear of reprisals.


CBS News correspondent Kelly Cobiella, reporting from Tripoli, said it was quiet in her part of the city Saturday, but there are signs the revolt is inching closer to the capital.


In the city's suburbs, anti-government protesters tried marching for the first time in days after Friday prayers. Witnesses say government forces answered with automatic weapons, shooting from rooftops.


Tripoli, home to about a third of Libya's population of 6 million, is the center of the eroding territory that Qaddafi still controls.


Even in the Qaddafi-held pocket of northwestern Libya around Tripoli, several cities have also fallen to the rebellion. Militiamen and pro-Qaddafi troops were repelled when they launched attacks trying to take back opposition-held territory in Zawiya and Misrata in fighting that killed at least 30 people.


Qaddafi's son, Seif al-Islam, told foreign journalists invited by the government to Tripoli that there were no casualties in Tripoli and that the capital was "calm."


"Everything is peaceful," he said. "Peace is coming back to our country."


He said the regime wants negotiations with the opposition and said there were "two minor problems" in Misrata and Zawiya. There, he said, "we are dealing with terrorist people," hut he hoped to reach a peaceful settlement with them.


Most shops in Tripoli were closed and long lines formed at bakeries as people ventured out for supplies.


In the Souq al-Jomaa neighborhood, piles of ashes stood in front of a burned-out police station. Graffiti on the walls read, "Down, down with Qaddafi." Elsewhere, shattered glass and rocks littered the streets.


A law school graduate walking to his house in the Fashloum area said he had seen many people killed by snipers in recent days.


"People are panicked, they are terrified. Few leave their houses. When it gets dark, you can't walk in the streets because anybody who walks is subject to be shot to death," he said.


He said Qaddafi's use of force against protesters had turned him against the regime.


"We Libyans cannot hear that there were other Libyans killed and remain silent," he said. "Now everything he says is a lie."


In Tripoli's Green Square, where state television has shown crowds of Qaddafi supporters in recent days, armed security men in blue uniforms were stationed around the plaza. Pro-Qaddafi billboards and posters were everywhere. A burned restaurant was the only sign of the unrest.


Supporters in about 50 cars covered with Qaddafi posters drove slowly around the square, waving green flags from the windows and honking horns. A camera crew filmed the procession.


Taxi driver Nasser Mohammed was among those who had a picture of Qaddafi and a green flag on his car.


"Have you heard the speech last night?" he asked. "It was great. Libyans don't want anyone but Qaddafi. He gave us loans."


Mohammed, 25, said each family will receive 500 Libyan dinars (about $400) after the start of the protests, plus the equivalent of about $100 credit for phone service. State TV said the distribution will take place starting Sunday.


Qaddafi loyalists manned a street barricade, turning away motorists trying to enter. After turning around, the drivers were then stopped at another checkpoint, manned by armed men in uniform, who searched cars and checked IDs of drivers and passengers.


In Misrata, a resident said the opposition was still in control of the city, which was calm Saturday, with many shops open and a local committee running civic affairs.


But the opposition only held parts of the sprawling Misrata Air Base after Friday's attack by Qaddafi supporters, he added.


The troops used tanks against the rebels at the base and succeeded in retaking part of it in battles with residents and army units who had joined the uprising against Qaddafi, said a doctor and a resident wounded in the battle on the edge of opposition-held Misrata, Libya's third-largest city, about 120 miles (200 kilometers) from the capital. The doctor said 25 people were killed in fighting at the base since Thursday.


The resident said pro-Qaddafi troops captured several members of the opposition Friday and now the two sides are talking about a possible swap since the opposition also captured a soldier and a brigadier general. Libyan state TV confirmed that an army Brig. Gen. Abu Bakr Ali was captured, although it said he was "kidnapped by terrorist gangs." The state-run news agency JANA also said regime opponents held the commander of the air defense's 2nd Division and several other officers.


State-run TV reported that the website of the JANA news agency was hacked.


The opposition also held complete control of Sabratha, a town west of Tripoli famed for nearby ancient Roman ruins, with no police or any security forces associated with the Qaddafi regime, said Khalid Ahmed, a resident. He added that tribes were trying to organize a march on Tripoli, although a checkpoint outside the capital would stop anyone from entering.


"All of Libya is together," Ahmed said. "We are not far from toppling the regime."


Thousands of evacuees from Libya reached ports Saturday across the Mediterranean, with many more still trying to flee the North African nation by sea, air or land.


More than 2,800 Chinese workers landed in Heraklion on the Greek island of Crete aboard a Greek ship Saturday, while another 2,200 Chinese arrived in Valletta, the capital of Malta, on a ship from the eastern Libyan port of Benghazi.


Thousands of expatriates streamed out of Libya at the bustling Tunisian border, most of them Egyptians and Tunisians.


More than 20,000 have arrived since early this week, said Heinke Veit of the European Union Humanitarian Aid group. Food, water and medical help is available, as are facilities to contact their families.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/02/26/501364/main20036734.shtml


4liIHOL_Uk0

Caledonian
Saturday, April 23rd, 2011, 07:17 AM
I've heard rumors that Syria and Iran is next guys.................

This war game is only just developing where Iran is the main target to protect Israeli interests in the middle east while western military powers simultaneously encircle Russia and China. This is the beginning of world war III.

RoyBatty
Saturday, April 23rd, 2011, 07:20 AM
NATO are trying to turn Libya into another Lebanon as the US, French and Israelis did in the 1980's.

Caledonian
Saturday, April 23rd, 2011, 07:31 AM
NATO are trying to turn Libya into another Lebanon as the US, French and Israelis did in the 1980's.

Another Lebanon? Could you please explain that a bit more indepth Roy? ;):thumbup

Caledonian
Saturday, April 23rd, 2011, 07:41 AM
IZzkMOzr14M


On March 25, Russia's RIA Novosti news service headlined, "Ground operation in Libya could start in April - Russian Intelligence," saying:

According to an unnamed high-ranking Russian intelligence official, "(t)he international coalition force is planning a ground operation that could start in late April. Information coming via different channels shows that NATO countries, with active participation of Britain and the United States, are developing a plan....From all indications, (it'll) be launched if the alliance fails to force Gaddafi....to capitulate."

The official estimates a late April-early May timetable. UN Resolution 1973 prohibits an occupation force, but authorizes "all necessary measures," including boots on the ground. Hawkish Western military analysts urge it, a March 25 Wall Street Journal report saying:

"The history of air-only military actions is that they rarely, if ever, defeat an adversary without" ground forces.

On March 26, Rick Rozoff's Stop NATO web site mentioned reports of US forces in Libya with a planned ground invasion coming next month. Various March 26 sources were cited, including:

(1) Sofia News Agency reporting:

"US forces are rumored to be already present on the ground in Libya," despite official denials. According to Reserve Colonel David Hand, American soldiers have been in Libya for 12 days. US intelligence Colonel Tony Scheffer confirmed it.

(2) Voice of Russia's Alexander Vatutin said:

"We are witnessing an attempt to seize oil and gas reserves by means of force. Apparently, coalition forces are pursuing targets other than humanitarian operations...." Dozens of civilian deaths are reported. "In the meantime, NATO has suggested the possibility of a ground operation in Libya unless Gaddafi chooses to surrender. The military are guided by the Second World War saying 'Put on the Ground' which means you can never expect to win unless you reach the enemy's positions on the ground." About 4,000 US marines are positioned in the Mediterranean to invade.

According to Russian Strategic Research Institute's Azhdar Kurtov, "a ground operation is inevitable" whether or not Gaddafi stays or goes, to seize Libya's strategic oil and gas reserves.

(3) AFP reported:

Washington and NATO partners may supply weapons to opposition forces. According to the Washington Post, "recently withdrawn US ambassador to Libya" Gene Cretz said "administration officials were having 'the full gamut' of discussions on 'potential assistance we might offer,' both on the non-lethal and the lethal side."

(4) RIA Novosti said:

"Any foreign military ground operation in Libya will be considered as occupying the country, Russia's envoy to NATO Dmitry Rogozin said on Saturday," in violation of Resolution 1973.

(5) Russia Today reported St. Petersburg State University Professor Guman Isayev saying:

Libya, like Iraq, is becoming a "black hole....As soon as it became clear that insurgents lost the battle," Resolution 1973 was passed, providing wide latitude for intervention. As a result, "Libya may cease to exist, de facto, the way Iraq did. On the other hand, it's unlikely that Gaddafi's regime can be overthrown by air strikes alone. The hopes that insurgents (could oust him) are failing despite active external support."

On Monday, March 28, Obama will address the nation on the Libyan conflict. Expect none of this to be mentioned, just the usual boilerplate propaganda about "humanitarian intervention," when, in fact, Washington's aims are always imperial.

As previous articles explained, a protracted, destructive conflict is likely, including mass casualties so America can solidify its grip on the entire Mediterranean Basin, exploiting its resources and people freely.



http://sjlendman.blogspot.com/2011/03/us-led-libyan-ground-assault-planned.html

Caledonian
Saturday, April 23rd, 2011, 08:23 PM
In all honesty I think this war is being waged pretty quickly in Libya headed by the United States because of the economical onslaught that is being pushed onto us and if a economical collapse happens within the United States Libya would be a quick implemented key strategic location to hinder Eastern expansion when it concerns strategic resources within that area of the world. [ With Libya, Egypt, and other key locations in the pockets of western allies you've practically sealed up the mediterranean or the suez canal militarily for what will become a global economical catastrophy where the military then takes over socially and politically all state institutions of authority within western allied nations who's economies become catastrophically infected.]

Things must be much worse for the United States economically for us to engage in another war with a country without any level of official political or social pretext for engaging. Atlast the United States has finally become even more of a military police state than it was say seven months ago.

Such is the interesting times we live in.......

Permafrost
Tuesday, April 26th, 2011, 11:24 AM
A French Jewish socialist leader, Laurent Fabius, said this morning on the radio that he was "in favor of a UNO intervention in Syria".

That instantly made me remember a video showing the interview of ex-general Wesley Clark where he says :

"As I went back through the Pentagon in November 2001, one of the senior military staff officers had time for a chat. Yes, we were still on track for going against Iraq, he said. But there was more. This was being discussed as part of a five-year campaign plan, and there were a total of seven countries, beginning with Iraq, then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Iran, Somalia, and Sudan."

SXS3vW47mOE

I definitely don't believe anymore in an unconstrained action of Arab folks to get "democracy" !

Bush used lies to invade countries, now it seems that Obama&Co have a different strategy : creating problems that make them gain support of the whole Occidental population, so they can invade these countries without any problem ...

flâneur
Tuesday, April 26th, 2011, 11:34 AM
I have just been reading that the Italian parliment has given the go ahead to use its air force against tanks and anti aircraft positions.

Im sure the Libyans are trembling in their boots knowing that the Italian armed forces are against them.....:naughty

velvet
Tuesday, April 26th, 2011, 12:07 PM
I definitely don't believe anymore in an unconstrained action of Arab folks to get "democracy" !

What I find really disgusting about our media here is that they still, despite that the US has admitted to have been organising this "grassroot protests", despite that US generals have admitted that half of the "rebels" are CIAl-Quaida, despite that the plans by Britain and France to invade Libya from last autumn have been revealed, and all the other revelations, just this morning there was this "correspondent" who claimed without blushing that "this are real freedom protests by the Arab people".

The facts are totally ignored and shunned by our so-called "free media", instead they make worse propaganda than even China could dream of, blatant lies and obviously false information whereever one looks. :thumbdown

Assad should print leaflets en masse to expose the scheme of the western world and not just say it here and there in TV that it's a plot. Same for Gaddafi. Although I could imagine that he does or at least tries to, considering that the west is so eager to break the national tv station Jara to shun this voice.

RoyBatty
Tuesday, April 26th, 2011, 12:09 PM
Another Lebanon? Could you please explain that a bit more indepth Roy? ;):thumbup

When the Middle East was carved up by the Imperialists around the time of the Ottoman Empire's demise circa WW1 (and guess who encouraged the Arab natives to revolt against the Turks back in them days, nudge nudge wink wink :D - for clues watch "Lawrence of Arabia") Lebanon was given to the French whilst the Brits grabbed countries such as Iraq. Borders were demarcated by that forerunner of the UN, the "League Of Nations".

(Spot all the amazing similarities with what's happening today with "Arab Spring where the UN rubberstamps more nastiness?") :D

So... in Lebanon things descended into an insane free-for-all in the 1970's as Civil War broke out between various Lebanese factions, the PLO who had a significant presence and bases there etc. Israel joined the party and eventually invaded in 1982. Imo it's sort of pointless to even try to make sense of what was going on during these years and keeping track of which sides were attacking which at what point.

A number of countries including the US, France, Italy, Israel and others had troops in Lebanon. This again led to series of attacks by various Lebanese militias against these foreign forces and more series of counterattacks by the foreign forces against various militias. Eventually the madness subsided as the sides tired of the endless pointless fighting and alliance shifting. USA, France and others left. Israel's economy (despite the endless supply of US Dollars) and morale was taking a hammering and they scaled back putting SLA ("South Lebanese Army") puppets in charge. These were eventually given a kicking in 2000 by Hezbollah and as Israel started withdrawing Hezbollah crushed the SLA.

Things started getting interesting again in 2005 when the USA, France and other ZOG powers promoted the "Cedar Revolution" in Lebanon. This was another example of a supposed "spontaneous people's uprising for "Western values, freedom, peace, democracy, Mickey Mouse, McDonalds" and all the associated type nonsense we come to expect.

The pattern here was pretty similar to what happened in Serbia, what we witnessed recently with "Arab Spring", what's happening in the Sudan and so forth. The idea is to implement regime change (with ZOG Puppets waiting in the wings to become Fearless Leader of course) or, failing this, to fragment the country and set the various factions against one another in a series of civil wars. Naturally the "good guys" are the ZOG / West seal-of-approval types whilst the "bad guys" are the ones who don't carry the kosher stamp.

That's what "The West" aka ZOG did in Yugoslavia, that's what they're doing in Lebanon and Sudan and that's what they're doing today in Libya.

flâneur
Tuesday, April 26th, 2011, 12:23 PM
for clues watch "Lawrence of Arabia")

At least he had the decency to go and hide in the ranks of the RAF in shame.

Wait....could this actually be "Stormin Norman" in the ranks of the French foreign legion doing the same after being used and abused by ZOG.....:-O

RoyBatty
Tuesday, April 26th, 2011, 12:56 PM
I have just been reading that the Italian parliment has given the go ahead to use its air force against tanks and anti aircraft positions.

Im sure the Libyans are trembling in their boots knowing that the Italian armed forces are against them.....:naughty

Time to dust off my old copy of Lion Of The Desert (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0081059/), sit back and enjoy the show! :D :thumbup

This movie tells the story of Omar Mukhtar, an Arab Muslim rebel who fought against the Italian conquest of Libya in WWI...

http://images.xpert-zone.com/images/2gtcg3m.jpg

flâneur
Tuesday, April 26th, 2011, 01:21 PM
Thats was the guy who Ghaddafi had hanging round his neck on his visit to Rome a while back.

Looks like the Italians are going to have the last laugh.

Neophyte
Thursday, April 28th, 2011, 10:01 AM
I have just been reading that the Italian parliment has given the go ahead to use its air force against tanks and anti aircraft positions.

Im sure the Libyans are trembling in their boots knowing that the Italian armed forces are against them.....:naughty

The Italians are ferocious fighters, it actually took a whole squad of French soldiers to stop the invading Italian army in 1940. :P

Neophyte
Thursday, April 28th, 2011, 10:12 AM
So... in Lebanon things descended into an insane free-for-all in the 1970's as Civil War broke out between various Lebanese factions...

Lebanon itself is a French creation. It was split off from Syria by the French in order to secure for them a politically manageable strategic asset.

Lebanon is basically the coast line of Syria, and its borders were chosen so as to make sure that no one ethnic/religious group were in a majority, always making sure that the French had someone to pit against the others (much like the British use of the Tamils in Sri Lanka).

flâneur
Thursday, April 28th, 2011, 03:56 PM
The Italians are ferocious fighters, it actually took a whole squad of French soldiers to stop the invading Italian army in 1940. :P

I think it was Rommel who said...."The Italians are capable of great feats of courage..............when theres a German machine gun nest positioned behind them."

RoyBatty
Sunday, May 15th, 2011, 02:53 PM
Soros / ZOG sponsored Arab Spring type "uprisings against undemocratic dictatorships" make use of a popular lobbying tactic / device known as Astro-turfing.

Astro-turfing is an ironic play on words of the term "Grassroots".

[The term "Grassroots" describe popular movements with supposedly community-based origins.]

Astro-turfing refers to the practice where situations are engineered to appear as if they have popular support and "grassroots" origins.

Caledonian
Monday, May 16th, 2011, 03:04 PM
Foreign embassies attacked in Tripoli after NATO airstrike that kills Gaddafi son, grandchildren


TRIPOLI, Libya — The U.S., British and Italian embassies were attacked and burnt by mobs in the Libyan capital Sunday, hours after a NATO airstrike was reported to have killed one of Moammar Gaddafi’s sons and three of his grandchildren.

 The Libyan leader survived the strike, which also killed three of his grandchildren. NATO rebuffed Gaddafi’s calls for a cease-fire and negotiations.

Libyan Deputy Foreign Minister Khaled Kaim said that only the commercial and consular department of the U.S. Embassy was attacked, but a former employee in Tripoli said the mob had caused extensive damage to buildings in the embassy compound and looted a warehouse.

A State Department spokesman said U.S. officials had “seen reports” of attacks on the U.S. Embassy but had no independent confirmation. A Tripoli resident, who asked not to be identified for his safety, said he had driven past the U.S. Embassy and seen black marks on the outside walls from fire, the green flag of the regime draped on the roof and pro-Gaddafi graffiti on the outside walls.

“If true, we condemn these attacks in the strongest possible terms,” spokesman Mark Toner said in Washington.

By not protecting foreign embassies, the Libyan government had “once again breached its international responsibilities and obligation,” he said.

Kaim said it was “a regrettable incident,” adding that mobs, some in the hundreds, attacked the lightly guarded embassies in the middle of the night. “That is why our police were outnumbered,” he said, adding that Libya promised to repair all the damage.

Meanwhile, in Moscow, Russia condemned the NATO airstrike Saturday on Tripoli, with the Foreign Ministry describing it as a disproportionate use of force.

Russia questioned NATO’s assertion that the alliance was not targeting Gaddafi or members of his family and called for “an immediate cease-fire and political settlement,” the Associated Press reported. Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, an ally of Gaddafi’s, also condemned the strike.

The Libyan government said Gaddafi’s son Saif al-Arab Gaddafi, 29, was at a gathering of relatives and friends when three missiles struck the family house just after 8 p.m. Saturday, causing huge explosions. The Libyan leader and his wife, Safiyah, were at the house but escaped unharmed, government spokesman Moussa Ibrahim said, calling the attack an assassination attempt. Kaim said a 6-month-old granddaughter, a 2-year-old grandson and a 2-year-old granddaughter also died, as did a friend of Gaddafi’s son.

In Brussels on Sunday, NATO spokeswoman Carmen Romero said the reported deaths of Gaddafi’s relatives remained unconfirmed.

“We targeted a military command and control building with a precision strike,” Romero told the AP. “It was not targeted against any individual. It was a military target, clearly linked to the Gaddafi’s regime’s systematic attacks on the civilian population.”

The White House on Sunday referred all questions about Saturday’s airstrike to NATO headquarters. But a White House official said the president does not review target lists in advance.

Prime Minister David Cameron of Britain, which has been at the forefront of the NATO campaign, told the BBC that the strike was in line with the U.N. mandate to prevent “a loss of civilian life by targeting Gaddafi's war-making machine.”



.Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), who recently returned from Libya, told CBS News’s “Face the Nation” that it is “not as easy as you think” to eliminate dictators or terrorist chiefs. “So we should be taking out his command and control, and if he is killed or injured because of that, that’s fine.”

Rebel-held city shelled

NATO has been accused of not doing enough to protect Libya’s citizens and responded by stepping up attacks on what it says are Gaddafi’s command and control centers, particularly in Tripoli.

But in Misurata, NATO has failed to prevent the heavy shelling of the besieged rebel-held city and its port. On Sunday, Libyan government forces unleashed a fresh barrage of shells on the port, as a humanitarian ship was unloading. Eight people were killed in the city Sunday and 23 were wounded, rebel spokesman Mohamed Ali said via Skype.

The Libyan government had tried to lay anti-ship mines in Misurata harbor Friday and threatened to attack any ships entering the port, including those carrying humanitarian aid, because rebels also are using the port to bring in arms, ammunition and weapons.

Emotions rose in Tripoli after the death of Gaddafi’s son was announced.

Video taken on a mobile phone by the Tripoli resident showed a car destroyed by fire, windows smashed and huge fire marks on the outside walls of the British ambassador’s residence. He said two police officers armed with Kalashnikovs at the gate had made no attempt to stop young men and children from entering and exploring the building.

British Foreign Secretary William Hague condemned the attacks and said that as a result of Libya’s failure to protect the missions, he had “taken the decision to expel the Libyan ambassador,” noting that the official, Omar Jelban, had 24 hours to leave Britain. “The attacks against diplomatic missions will not weaken our resolve to protect the civilian population in Libya,” he said.

The Italian Foreign Ministry said in a statement that “there were attacks of vandalism against the buildings of a number of foreign embassies in Tripoli, including the Italian Embassy.”

Britain, Italy and the United States had withdrawn diplomatic staff from Libya weeks ago. In March, Britain also expelled five Libyan diplomats in protest of the Libyan regime’s actions, saying they could pose a threat to national security.

Clear signs of residence

Reporters were taken to the destroyed residence before dawn Sunday and again in daylight hours. There were no obvious signs of military command and control facilities, but there were clear signs that the buildings were being used as a residence at the time of the attack.

In a kitchen, rice, pasta, fish and stuffed peppers were on a stove, with a wall clock stopped at 8:08 p.m., the time of the attack. In the building, which took a direct hit, women’s dresses were buried in the concrete debris and dust, while a mounted elephant’s tusk was visible.

Ibrahim, the Libyan government spokesman, said intelligence about Gaddafi’s whereabouts or plans must have been leaked to NATO, he speculated. “Is it satellite technology? Is it some listening devices?”

Onlookers traipsed through the ruins, and a busload of women brandishing portraits of Gaddafi arrived to chant slogans, shouting that foreign journalists were “liars.” Outside, a car slowed down and its passengers shouted that the foreign media were “dogs.” Gaddafi’s regime says the foreign news media have not reported the truth about the support he enjoys among ordinary Libyans, and government minders openly tell reporters that they are to blame for NATO airstrikes and the deaths of Libyan children.

Then another car drove up, dragging a large American flag from its bumper. After a brief attempt to burn the flag, the crowd, chanting pro-Gaddafi slogans, tore it to shreds.

Although people in opposition-held eastern Libya were skeptical about news of the death of Gaddafi’s son, suspecting the Libyan leader was playing a trick to undermine NATO’s resolve, a French surgeon said he had examined the bodies of one man and two of the dead children.

“According to the photos we have seen, it is very probably the son of Colonel Gaddafi,” said Gerard Le Clouerec of the Rhama Clinic, adding that the skin on man’s face was largely intact but that his skull was in pieces from the pressure of the blast. “I can’t be absolutely certain, but it is the same type of young man, the same size, the same beard and thin moustache.”


Staff writers Scott Wilson and Joby Warrick in Washington and Leila Fadel in Benghazi contributed to this report.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/british-italian-embassies-attacked-in-tripoli-following-nato-airstrike-that-kills-gaddafi-son-grandchildren/2011/05/01/AFVqZjTF_story_1.html

RoyBatty
Monday, May 16th, 2011, 03:22 PM
"Western" devils speak with forked tongue.

USA / UK / Frog / WOP / NATO mafia "once again breached its international responsibilities" by attacking the North Korean embassy.

BRUSSELS, May 12 (Xinhua) -- NATO on Thursday dismissed media reports that a NATO air strike damaged the embassy of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) in Tripoli.

"It has been alleged that NATO attacked the embassy; this is simply not true. In fact, the embassy is located some 500 meters from the target we struck," the alliance said in a statement.


:-O


According to the statement, NATO attacked a command and control bunker complex in downtown Tripoli last night.


C & C's like Ghaddafi's grandchildren for example. In any case, why are NATO bombing Libya?


"While we are aware of media reports that there was damage to the North Korean embassy, we have no knowledge of possible collateral damage," it said.

"Our strikes are precise and while the possibility of collateral damage will always exist, we go to great lengths to reduce such possibilities," it concluded.

uh .... yeah right.....

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/world/2011-05/12/c_13872223.htm

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2011/05/12/uk-libya-northkorea-embassy-idUKTRE74B1PK20110512

Heinrich Harrer
Monday, May 16th, 2011, 03:35 PM
It's funny how they always 'accidentally' manage to hit the North Korean or Chinese embassies in those countries. And then they go on to boast how precise their air strikes are, as if to make sure that the Chinese get the message.

velvet
Monday, May 16th, 2011, 03:48 PM
...openly tell reporters that they are to blame for NATO airstrikes and the deaths of Libyan children


Yeah, who else?

It's NATO, Britain, France, US who are bombing Libya and kill people because of the US/Wall Street funded "rebels" who started a civil war and now whine that they dont get enough to support for their already weeks ago lost pseudo-"freedom fight".

Bah, it's so disgusting to see these people and that no one dares to shout a stop this shit at them :(

RoyBatty
Monday, May 16th, 2011, 04:09 PM
WASHINGTON, May 12 (Xinhua) -- NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen on Thursday envisioned a role for the military alliance in the reconstruction of Libya after the government of Muammar Gaddafi is toppled.


First NATO attacks this sovereign country, then it naturally envisions placing itself in charge of the Protection Racket which will control that country.


"In a post-Gaddafi era, I think we may still have a role to play in assisting a new Libyan government in the transition to a sustainable democracy," Rasmussen said in response to a question after making a speech on NATO at the Washington-based Johns Hopkins University.


The Secretary General of an unelected non-democratic Organisation which acts unilaterally and without any mandate (unless the idiotic UN Resolution is supposed to qualify???) to overthrow the government of and invade a sovereign country then delivers a lecture on "democracy" in the country which is the world's most active exporter of International Terror?

The lunatics have taken over the asylum.



"One of the areas where NATO has particular expertise is reform of the military and security sectors," he added, noting that a central part of transition to democracy is for the military and security sectors coming under "democratic control."


"Democratic Control" = NATO-lese for ZOG & NATO Control.


"To that end, we need reforms, and this is an area where NATO could assist," the NATO chief said.


Libyans say hello to the Western Imperialists. They are back in business.

wm mauer
Monday, May 16th, 2011, 04:46 PM
It is just my opinion but I think these maniacs are trying to start a ww with China & Russia. America's economy is beyond recovery. I think this is like the 30s & they want to eliminate a whole lot of people. China had 30,000 citizens in Libya working the Oil business & other strategic (to them) areas & 29,000 (per Bob Chapman of the International Forecaster) were sent home. Shortly after their repatriation a Chinese monetary official said his country wanted to dump 2 trillion us dollars.

Shall get interesting ;)

Chlodovech
Monday, May 16th, 2011, 04:54 PM
Having seen this documentary about the life and work of Brother Leader, I understand better now what this conflict is all about. :)

5fqr4oCSYa4

_7c91Vpz7eo

eOwEkl8uztw

b9DesnqNTxM

seFkt4GUYdw

psGbSGsqlqo

O0BwZeBugLA

RoyBatty
Monday, May 16th, 2011, 05:28 PM
It is just my opinion but I think these maniacs are trying to start a ww with China & Russia.


Imo these maniacs are more interested in doing an "Ottoman Empire", "Soviet Union" or "Yugoslavia" on Russia than start a WW with it. In other words, they want to fragment it so that they can feast upon the individual limbs of the carcass.

In order to fragment it they

- stoke up ethnic tensions,
- promote internal discord with the current leadership,
- flood the country with drugs,
- back terrorist movements and provide a safe haven in the West for their leaders and propaganda machinery,
- pay off corrupt politicians to do their bidding,
- install 5th Columnists in various influential roles to sabotage the system from within,
- encourage the acceptance of Liberal and Globalist values,
- employ economic blackmail and subversive tactics (stalled WTO entry, Jackson-Vanik etc)

and so forth.

Although they play similarish games with China from time to time (Tibet for example) there's less enthusiasm for this. One of the most likely reasons why is because China doesn't have Russia's landmass and mineral & energy supplies.

wm mauer
Monday, May 16th, 2011, 05:42 PM
Imo these maniacs are more interested in doing an "Ottoman Empire", "Soviet Union" or "Yugoslavia" on Russia than start a WW with it. In other words, they want to fragment it so that they can feast upon the individual limbs of the carcass.

In order to fragment it they

- stoke up ethnic tensions,
- promote internal discord with the current leadership,
- flood the country with drugs,
- back terrorist movements and provide a safe haven in the West for their leaders and propaganda machinery,
- pay off corrupt politicians to do their bidding,
- install 5th Columnists in various influential roles to sabotage the system from within,
- encourage the acceptance of Liberal and Globalist values,
- employ economic blackmail and subversive tactics (stalled WTO entry, Jackson-Vanik etc)

and so forth.

Although they play similarish games with China from time to time (Tibet for example) there's less enthusiasm for this. One of the most likely reasons why is because China doesn't have Russia's landmass and mineral & energy supplies.


They are certainly doing everything that you have notated, Roy, & your words have much wisdom. My research leads me to think that they want to start a world war. I realize that they view the rest of the world as "useless eaters" & would like nothing better than to do away with us all. I will continue my studies on this topic for there is always more pieces to cobble together to bring the puzzle into fuller focus. I appreciate your discussion with me.

China is a horse of a different color of course.

RoyBatty
Monday, May 16th, 2011, 06:29 PM
My research leads me to think that they want to start a world war.


My theory is that they'd have started a war with Russia by now if they could have afforded to do so but the nuclear deterrent (MAD - Mutually Assured Destruction) is holding them back and forcing them to tread carefully and explore alternative avenues such as sponsoring internal dissent, using economic strangulation, military encirclement etc.

Hence the enthusiasm for Star Wars aka "the Missile Defense Shield" because the intention and NeoCon / ZOG blueprint calls for the weaponisation and dominance of Space and First Strike Capabilities over any adversary.

The MDS was billed by them to be a "defense against rogue states like Iran and North Korea" but in reality was and still is aimed against mainly Russia but also China. It was comical how Dumbya & his Semite mafia kept claiming that the proposed installation of Missile Interceptors and Radars in Poland and the Czech Republic were supposed to be intended for dealing with potential North Korean and Iranian missile launches.

I realize that they view the rest of the world as "useless eaters" & would like nothing better than to do away with us all.


Yes I believe that they are thinking along those lines. Hence the frequent stories planted in their media about "sustainable development", a "sustainable population" etc. They probably want to do away with many (but not all) of us. They will probably want to retain a core of low class workers (preferably not very intelligent ones) who will perform the menial labour / servant tasks and who will be relatively simple and troublefree to maintain and manage.

The rest of the world, particularly Whites, will become surplus to requirements with perhaps some exceptions made for a few blonde Slavic and Germanic women. (the Semites are obsessed with these).


I will continue my studies on this topic for there is always more pieces to cobble together to bring the puzzle into fuller focus. I appreciate your discussion with me.


Take a look at William Engdahl's articles on the

- doomsday seedvault in Norway (brought to you by Bill Gates, Warren Buffet, the Rockefellers, Monsanto & Co,
(what a bunch of philanthropists and friends of humanity they are eh?) :D

Also

- Monsanto / US Govt / ZOG's relentless pursuit over complete control of the food cycle (genetically modified seeds with terminator genes which effectively self-destruct meaning that the plants which develop from them are sterile), farms, food production and so forth.

- new legislation being introduced via Congress to effectively outlaw / ban small food producers from selling their products (supposedly on "public health" grounds) thereby making the general public completely reliant on Corporations in order to be fed.


China is a horse of a different color of course.

yep

wm mauer
Monday, May 16th, 2011, 06:59 PM
- doomsday seedvault in Norway (brought to you by Bill Gates, Warren Buffet, the Rockefellers, Monsanto & Co,
(what a bunch of philanthropists and friends of humanity they are eh?) :D

Also

- Monsanto / US Govt / ZOG's relentless pursuit over complete control of the food cycle (genetically modified seeds with terminator genes which effectively self-destruct meaning that the plants which develop from them are sterile), farms, food production and so forth.

- new legislation being introduced via Congress to effectively outlaw / ban small food producers from selling their products (supposedly on "public health" grounds) thereby making the general public completely reliant on Corporations in order to be fed.


Yes, GMA is one of their tools to destroy us.

http://www.anunews.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/aa-Dees-Frankenfood.jpg

velvet
Wednesday, May 18th, 2011, 08:55 PM
It's funny how they always 'accidentally' manage to hit the North Korean or Chinese embassies in those countries.

And how this 'accident' coincides with the "discovery" of allegedly illegal weapon export by North Korea to Iran and other crisis countries :-O

http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtribune/WTARC/2011/me_iran0599_05_18.asp

Caledonian
Saturday, May 21st, 2011, 08:12 AM
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-xFQNq8oQJ3g/TdcX1UBfVRI/AAAAAAAAI6s/o2_UjEGvVF0/s1600/obama-war-is-peace.jpg

White House on War Powers Deadline: 'Limited' US Role in Libya Means No Need to Get Congressional Authorization




In an effort to satisfy those arguing he needs to seek congressional authorization to continue US military activity in accordance with the War Powers Resolution, President Obama wrote a letter to congressional leaders this afternoon suggesting that the role is now so “limited” he does not need to seek congressional approval.

“Since April 4,” the president wrote, “U.S. participation has consisted of: (1) non-kinetic support to the NATO-led operation, including intelligence, logistical support, and search and rescue assistance; (2) aircraft that have assisted in the suppression and destruction of air defenses in support of the no-fly zone; and (3) since April 23, precision strikes by unmanned aerial vehicles against a limited set of clearly defined targets in support of the NATO-led coalition's efforts.”

A senior administration official told ABC News that the letter is intended to describe “a narrow US effort that is intermittent and principally an effort to support to support the ongoing NATO-led and UN-authorized civilian support mission and no fly zone.”

“The US role is one of support,” the official said, “and the kinetic pieces of that are intermittent.”

From the beginning of the U.S. military intervention in Libya, the Obama administration has cited the 1973 War Powers Act as the legal basis of its ability to conduct military activities for 60 days without first seeking a declaration of war from Congress. The military intervention started on March 19; Congress was notified on March 21. Those 60 days expire today.

The president thanked the congressional leaders – House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Kentucky --- for the support that they have “demonstrated for this mission and for our brave service members, as well as your strong condemnation of the Qaddafi regime.”

The president voiced support for a bipartisan resolution drafted by Senators John Kerry, D-Mass., John McCain, R-Ariz., Carl Levin, D-Mich., Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., Lindsey Graham, R-SC, and Joe Lieberman, I-Conn., stating that Congress “supports the U.S. mission in Libya and that both branches are united in their commitment to supporting the aspirations of the Libyan people for political reform and self-government…Congressional action in support of the mission would underline the U.S. commitment to this remarkable international effort.”

Earlier this month, Kerry – who chairs the Senate Foreign Relations Committee – described his resolution as “in limbo.”

-Jake Tapper



http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2011/05/white-house-on-war-powers-deadline-limited-us-role-in-libya-means-no-need-to-get-congressional-autho.html

Heinrich Harrer
Sunday, May 29th, 2011, 03:39 PM
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/may/28/uk-training-saudi-troops
UK training Saudi forces used to crush Arab spring

Britain is training Saudi Arabia's national guard – the elite security force deployed during the recent protests in Bahrain – in public order enforcement measures and the use of sniper rifles. The revelation has outraged human rights groups, which point out that the Foreign Office recognises that the kingdom's human rights record is "a major concern".

In response to questions made under the Freedom of Information Act, the Ministry of Defence has confirmed that British personnel regularly run courses for the national guard in "weapons, fieldcraft and general military skills training, as well as incident handling, bomb disposal, search, public order and sniper training". The courses are organised through the British Military Mission to the Saudi Arabian National Guard, an obscure unit that consists of 11 British army personnel under the command of a brigadier.

The MoD response, obtained yesterday by the Observer, reveals that Britain sends up to 20 training teams to the kingdom a year. Saudi Arabia pays for "all BMM personnel, as well as support costs such as accommodation and transport".

Bahrain's royal family used 1,200 Saudi troops to help put down demonstrations in March. At the time the British government said it was "deeply concerned" about reports of human rights abuses being perpetrated by the troops.

"Britain's important role in training the Saudi Arabian national guard in internal security over many years has enabled them to develop tactics to help suppress the popular uprising in Bahrain," said Nicholas Gilby of the Campaign Against Arms Trade.

Analysts believe the Saudi royal family is desperate to shore up its position in the region by preserving existing regimes in the Gulf that will help check the increasing power of Iran.

"Last year we raised concerns that the Saudis had been using UK-supplied and UK-maintained arms in secret attacks in Yemen that left scores of Yemeni civilians dead," said Oliver Sprague, director of Amnesty International's UK Arms Programme.

(...)


I think this shows all the hypocrisy involved. In Libya they arm the rebels and condemn Gaddhafi for trying to squelch the uprising, when it concerns their friends in Saudi Arabia on the other hand they even help them to crush the protests.

Roderic
Tuesday, June 28th, 2011, 01:43 PM
Feel free to spread this site around because it is one of very few sources like it’s type out there.

http://www.obamaslibya.com/

Godwinson
Tuesday, June 28th, 2011, 02:23 PM
http://www.obamaslibya.com/

So these are the types of individuals we're supporting then?

Well, you can count me out :thumbdown

OneWolf
Tuesday, June 28th, 2011, 02:57 PM
The reason why we are at war with Libya is simple,they have a large reserve of
oil and Col. Gadhafi has amassed a fortune in Gold Bullion!

It's all about Americas National Security and self interests...plain and simple!
Either Gadhafi plays by "Americas" rules or he is toast!

Remember Saddam....


BNkM9o41lb4

Heinrich Harrer
Tuesday, June 28th, 2011, 11:28 PM
http://www.thelocal.de/national/20110628-35925.html
Germany to supply bombs for Libya mission

Germany will supply bombs and weapons technology to NATO for the military intervention into Libya despite its stated opposition to the mission, according to a media report.

The website of news magazine Der Spiegel reported Monday night that NATO, facing a shortage of bombs, approached all its members last week about contributing the components and technology for bombs and other weapons.

Berlin has agreed and Defence Minister Thomas de Maizière has approved the measure. The Bundeswehr will supply bomb parts and complete shells to the NATO Maintenance and Supply Agency (NAMSA), the magazine reported, citing government sources.

So far there have been no requests from NAMSA for specific parts or shells, though the details of what NATO needs are expected to be sent through within a few days. Then it will be decided whether the Bundeswehr can help and how quickly it can supply the weapons technology needed.

The move represents another concession by Germany after its surprise abstention in the United Nations Security Council on the vote to authorize military action. Along with its refusal to commit forces to the mission, the decision earned the ire of its closest allies including the United States, France and Britain.

German government figures, notably Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle, has since spoken critically of the mission. But the German government appears to hope that its isolation on the Libya issue will be partly mitigated with the latest move.

Since then, planes from those three allies, under the command of NATO have been bombing Libya in order to contain dictator Muammar Qaddafi and help the rebels who have been trying to depose him since the uprising began in February.

The request from NATO follows repeated warnings from Britain in particular that the daily attacks and long patrol flights could no continue at such pace. There was now a clear shortage of air-to-ground missiles, which the sorties over Tripoli and other parts of the country urgently need.

velvet
Wednesday, June 29th, 2011, 10:58 AM
The request from NATO follows repeated warnings from Britain in particular that the daily attacks and long patrol flights could no continue at such pace.

Yeah, Britain (and France), maybe you should have thought about that before you start a war. What have we to do with it? We didnt approve (or disapproved) the war of aggression for no reason other than western greed, we took the position that its not our business. Look that you solve your troubles yourself. :shrug

Imho, it's best to end this madness anyway. The sooner the better.

CIAl Quaida are not "peaceful protesters", they are not "freedom rebels", and they dont have any business in Libya anyway. They dont deserve support, in fact, IF the west meddles with that at all, it should fight against the terrorists, not feed them and sustain their illegal takeover!

Ingvaeonic
Wednesday, June 29th, 2011, 01:15 PM
And to add to this mix some idiot in the International Criminal Court issued a warrant for the arrest of Gaddafi for crimes against humanity, thus ensuring that Gaddafi cannot negotiate his survival and condemning him to fight to the death. Brilliant tactics, once again, from the West.

Neophyte
Wednesday, June 29th, 2011, 01:38 PM
And to add to this mix some idiot in the International Criminal Court issued a warrant for the arrest of Gaddafi for crimes against humanity, thus ensuring that Gaddafi cannot negotiate his survival and condemning him to fight to the death. Brilliant tactics, once again, from the West.

If the goal is to have as many Libyans killing each other as possible while NATO gets to bomb away as much of their non-essential infrastructure—i.e. not essential for oil extraction—as possible, that is not a bad move. When NATO finally moves in they will still have to deal with the party left, and the weaker and fewer they are the better for NATO.

Ingvaeonic
Wednesday, June 29th, 2011, 01:47 PM
I can remember Kissinger saying in the early 1970s, only a few years after Gaddafi seized power, that it was not out of the question for the United States to invade and occupy an oil-rich Arab nation if oil supplies to the West were threatened, and he used Libya as the example. I think the strategists in the US have been itching for decades to invade oil-rich countries in the Middle East and North Africa. It is only since 1991, the year that changed everything, that it has come to fruition.

OneWolf
Wednesday, June 29th, 2011, 02:03 PM
I can remember Kissinger saying in the early 1970s, only a few years after Gaddafi seized power, that it was not out of the question for the United States to invade and occupy an oil-rich Arab nation if oil supplies to the West were threatened, and he used Libya as the example. I think the strategists in the US have been itching for decades to invade oil-rich countries in the Middle East and North Africa. It is only since 1991, the year that changed everything, that it has come to fruition.

Let me ask you something....Where does Australia get most of it's oil from?
I have a feeling that the answer is going to be from the Middle East.

Being an American,I don't think it is a good idea to let some Camel Jockey in
a desert somewhere tell me how much I pay for oil or when I can get it.

The Americans and the British are the ones who are/where responsible for the
development of most of the Middle Easts proven oilfields.As a matter of fact
it was a Geologist from Oklahoma who discovered the massive Anwar oilfield
in Saudi Arabia.

So to make a long story short,when I make a total investment in a project,I
expect to reap most of the rewards!

Ingvaeonic
Wednesday, June 29th, 2011, 04:27 PM
Let me ask you something....Where does Australia get most of it's oil from?
I have a feeling that the answer is going to be from the Middle East.

Being an American,I don't think it is a good idea to let some Camel Jockey in
a desert somewhere tell me how much I pay for oil or when I can get it.

The Americans and the British are the ones who are/where responsible for the
development of most of the Middle Easts proven oilfields.As a matter of fact
it was a Geologist from Oklahoma who discovered the massive Anwar oilfield
in Saudi Arabia.

So to make a long story short,when I make a total investment in a project,I
expect to reap most of the rewards!

I'm well aware of the fact that Americans and British are responsible for developing the oilfields of the Middle East. So what? If it weren't the US or Britain it would have been some other Western country. And yes, Australia gets most of its oil from the Middle East. Again, so what? Australia does not initiate and lead invasions of oil-producing countries.

But I will ask you, as an American, if some "camel jockey" in the Middle East is restricting or limiting the supply of oil from its own oil resources to the US or anywhere else, what gives the US right to invade it, i.e. that oil-producing country concerned? So US consumers of petrol, or gasoline if you like, can refuel their cars at the cheapest possible price? That's an absolutely childishly self-centred attitude to adopt. US or British capital investment in the Middle East oilfields does not give the US the right to invade a sovereign country because that country's govt is restricting the supply of oil. Military action to maintain the oil supply from one or several oil-producing countries in the Middle East simply because their armed forces are soft and easily defeated is simply not justified.

Why doesn't the US try regime-change on a country like North Korea, which proliferates atomic weapons, is bitterly hostile to the United States, and whose fanatical hatred of the US is white-hot. Indeed, the North Koreans are highly aggressive and have tried to provoke America, short of all-out invasion of South Korea, several times since the end of the Korean War in 1953. Why will the US not invade North Korea? Because it is not an oil-producing country; it potentially has atomic weapons; and it is too tough a nut militarily to crack with more than enough conventional weapons and a fanatical soldiery that is prepared to fight to the death. Being a major oil producer with a soft military, such as Iraq, marks a country as a target for US military action.

Renwein
Wednesday, June 29th, 2011, 04:31 PM
CIAl Quaida

the correct term in conspiricy circles is
'al-CIAda'
or
'al-CIA, duh'! :P

**************************************** *

here's the article which accomapanies the videos;

Graphic Video of Libyan Rebel Beheading Gadhaffi Soldier

By Susan Lindauer, former CIA Asset covering Libya

NATO has been pumping propaganda out of Libya to justify its “humanitarian war” against the government of Moammar Gadhaffi. Until now, NATO has succeeded in large part because ordinary citizens around the world have no access to direct intelligence on which to base their own opinions. As the former CIA Asset who covered Libya at the United Nations from 1995 to 2003 during negotiations for the Lockerbie Trial, I am compelled to break past that propaganda to examine actual evidence.

Responding to numerous requests, I am sharing primary evidence that I receive daily from sources inside Tripoli. Video documentation comes from Libyan refugees, collected by a fact finding commission called “Global Civilians for Peace in Libya.” The fact-finding team includes Europeans, Africans, Americans and international human rights attorneys, who are preparing allegations of War Crimes against NATO. Judging from these videos, financial damages that NATO will be required to pay Libya should be stupendous, indeed.

Above all, it’s clear NATO has grossly misrepresented its arguments at the United Nations, in order to justify military action against Gadhaffi. Britain and France trusted bad intelligence from unreliable sources, trying to gain power from the conflict. A more careful investigation shows that it is the NATO Rebels who are guilty of serious war crimes—not Gadhaffi’s soldiers at all. Sanctions should be thrown out, and NATO should shift its military forces to back Gadhaffi in defending the Libyan people.

Never play truth or dare with a spy.

The videos portray horrific atrocities. There are two important reasons why NATO Rebels would commit these acts. First, in committing war crimes, NATO Rebels have deployed a strategy for provoking panic and confusion at the street level, where they must control the people. They have frightened their opposition into silent submission. Ordinary Libyans can see with their own eyes that Libyan Rebels are all powerful, protected by NATO and CIA enforcers. Pro-Gadhaffi loyalists had better shut their mouths or face terrible consequences.

At the same time, Libyan Rebels have discovered a way to punch NATO’s buttons, and fire up the engines for the “Humanitarian War–” For some reason, the world is supposed to believe that Gadhaffi’s government—which has no history of attacking its own people in 41 years of rule—is suddenly guilty of the most hideous offenses.

Those of us who have studied Libya closely have opposite expectations. Historically, Gadhaffi has been so tenacious and protective of his people that he refused to hand over two Libyan men for the Lockerbie trial, despite years of U.N. sanctions. Gadhaffi knew the men were innocent, and would not get a fair shake in Court. To sum up, Lockerbie was a false flag operation to hide rogue CIA involvement in heroin trafficking out of the Bekaa Valley in Lebanon, during the Terry Anderson hostage crisis.

A joint team of CIA, FBI and Defense Intelligence investigators were flying on Pan Am 103 that day, heading for Washington to expose the heroin ring, when the plane exploded over Lockerbie, Scotland. Libya got tagged as the fall guy, but like 9/11, the truth refused to die. And Gadhaffi refused to back down. He stood by his people, despite punishing international pressures.

Gadhaffi’s guess proved correct, by the way. In one of the most shameful episodes of corruption ever at the International Courts, the U.S. bribed two witnesses at the Lockerbie Trial with $4 million pay offs. After both witnesses recanted and confessed to the payments, the only Libyan convicted in the Pan Am 103 bombing, Abdelbasset Megrahi, won a “compassionate release” from Scottish prison in August, 2009, ostensibly so he could go home to die of cancer.

Gadhaffi’s actions reveal a great deal about his character. As a leader, does he throw his people to the wolves? Or abandon them for convenience? Notoriously not. He claims the Libyan people as his own. He protects them no matter the cost to himself.

These videos are the reality check. Ironically, by claiming Gadhaffi’s forces have been responsible for rape crimes specifically, NATO has made a glaring admission that War Crimes are in fact occurring inside Libya. Headlines that Gadhaffi issued Viagra to fuel rape binges by his soldiers played very well on CNN. However former Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney has determined that the only major purchaser of Viagra bound for Libya was the U.S. Government itself, which handed out Little Blue Pills to older Rebel soldiers to energize them for battle.

That strategy has backfired. Ordinary Libyans are fleeing Rebel strongholds, racing to the protection of Gadhaffi’s central authority for safety.

The Bad Guys

These videos look awfully like Al Qaeda to me. But don’t take my word for it. Look at the evidence and decide for yourself. They’re hosted at FederalJack.com on a special site, ObamasLibya.com, because it’s got hefty security and rock solid courage to speak truth to power. FederalJack.com will not back down. More videos will be added in coming weeks.

The first video shows a Libyan rebel beheading a Libyan soldier. If it looks like Iraq, well golly, the highest percentage of foreign fighters in Iraq (and Chechnya and Afghanistan) came from Eastern Libya. Unhappily for NATO, there’s no avoiding that this video was shot in Libya: The men are speaking a Libyan Arab dialect with its own distinct accent.

The second video shows gruesome footage of a Libyan rebel cutting up the rotted flesh of a dead soldier and forcing it into the hands of Libyan Prisoners of War, who are lined up in a row so they must eat it.

Another video shows a group of Rebels sodomizing a civilian with a pistol. Another shows a crowd of Rebels hanging and beheading a Libyan soldier.

Another video shows CIA operatives working side by side Rebel forces, and driving around in trucks— proof that U.S. forces are already in Libya in violation of President Obama’s promise to Congress to keep boots off the ground.

Another video shows several dead Libyan soldiers with their throats cut, lying in the back of a truck. The killings violate the Geneva Conventions of War, which protect enemy soldiers after capture. In the excitement, NATO Rebels encouraged a frightened on-looker to video the butchery and claim that Gadhaffi’s forces were responsible. Afterward, the man with the video grabbed his family and fled the Rebel stronghold. That’s how the video reached the fact-finding group in Tripoli.

It’s all on ObamasLibya.com, hosted by Federal Jack, with our greatest thanks for having the guts to show the truth, which corporate media lacks. It’s so barbaric that it defies understanding how NATO could have envisioned these Rebels as holding any leadership potential at all.

Rape As a Weapon of War

Worst than you thought, right? Most notoriously up to this point, it has become evident that Rebels are using rape as a war-time punishment of pro-Gadhaffi or “neutral” families. In Islamic culture, the whole family suffers stigmas after rape, a sort of communal punishment.

Right now a team of female human rights attorneys are interviewing rape victims. Two rape testimonials and other eye witness reports are provided here. For the attorney affidavit on the larger problem, go to ObamasLibya.com. Understand that new documentation is arriving daily from Tripoli.

However these are not the most graphic stories. The problem in collecting it is traveling hundreds of miles through checkpoints and bombs. By explanation, as of June 22, non-governmental fact finders are traveling 200 miles to video a boy who got castrated and both eyes gouged out by NATO Rebels as punishment for refusing to join their paramilitary unit.

Other video getting collected comes from a father, who describes the kidnapping of his virgin daughter from a pro-Gadhaffi family. After dragging her out of the house at gun-point and taking her to a rape party, NATO rebels cut off her breasts with a knife, and she bled to death.

Human rights investigators are now interviewing a Libyan Woman from Zawia who survived a brutal gang rape that cut off her breasts. Miraculously, horrified on-lookers saved her from bleeding to death, when excited Rebels ran off, firing their guns in the air. She’s been hospitalized, but she’s too physically and mentally damaged to handle the interview at the moment. International human rights attorney are standing by.

We urgently seek an American sponsor so this Libyan woman can undergo reconstructive surgery in the United States or Europe.

On June 19, Gadhaffi soldiers entering Misurata rescued another rape survivor. The young woman had been kidnapped and held hostage for 20 days. Rebel forces gang raped her every single day, round the clock, until Gadhaffi’s forces broke through their lines and saved her life.

So much for NATO’s humanitarian mission. Clearly NATO has been grossly deceived, and should cease at once from protecting these Rebels who are monstrously abusive to the Libyan people. U.S. tax dollars are training a New Taliban to intimidate the Libyan people into submission, while the West plunders Libya’s wealth.

But NATO failed to take into account the spirit of the Libyan people. Libya has a powerful history and traditions of resilience in defending its sovereignty from foreign invaders. Libyan families and Tribal Leaders are determined to seek financial damages from every NATO and Arab country that supports the rebels. So long as NATO provides training, uniforms, military assault rifles, jeeps and transportation, ground advisers and air power—-NATO will be forced to take responsibility for these crimes. Financial damages will come out of funding for NATO’s own citizens—out of education, health care, government pensions, universities, roads, bridges, you name it.

Patrick Haseldine, a British expert on Libya’s conflict with NATO, has calculated current British financial damages at $2.8 billion.

All of it begs the question why NATO governments should want to support these Rebels in the first place? Indeed, all of us should ask some important questions.

Should President Obama spend hard-earned U.S. tax dollars from the Middle Class to finance this War? Should America assume the role of training Al Qaeda forces and function as Al Qaeda enforcers? While our great nation bleeds red ink? While Americans struggle to find jobs and fight off foreclosures? Knowing that our soldiers are exhausted from two other failed Wars—fighting these same Al Qaeda Rebels in Iraq and Afghanistan?

And why exactly should America prop up NATO, so that the British and French can relive their glory days of Empire? Is it worth risking our Empire and prosperity? Really?

These videos reveal a whole different truth. The CIA will probably get mad that I have released them. But good Intelligence Assets are supposed to deliver brutal honesty. We’re not supposed to hide ugly truths. We’re supposed to get information that leaders—and communities— urgently need to make the most informed choices in policymaking. It happens to be very, very ugly intelligence. But it would be wrong for me to spare you.

In my opinion as a former U.S. Asset, the United States should break ties with the Libyan rebels and cut off financing immediately.

We’re pulling back the intelligence curtain, so you can decide for yourself.

About the Author: Susan Lindauer worked in anti-terrorism covering Libya, Iraq, Egypt, Yemen, Syria and Malaysia at the United Nations. Her team gave advance warning about the 9/11 attack. She is the author of Extreme Prejudice: The Terrifying Story of the Patriot Act and the Cover Ups of 9/11 and Iraq.
(original (http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/06/23/the-ugly-truth-video-of-libyan-rebel-beheading-gadhaffi-soldier-cannibalism-rape-and-other-nato-war-crimes/))

i'm not sure about the 'obama's war' angle though because:
i) it's dumb bipartisanship to blame 'obama' for it, rather than the 'us government' or 'polital elite' or whatever your favorite phrase for it is (NATO, the west, ZOG...)
ii) sarkozy and cameron pushed this harder than obama

velvet
Wednesday, June 29th, 2011, 05:10 PM
the correct term in conspiricy circles is
'al-CIAda'
or
'al-CIA, duh'! :P

Then they've quoted me and Roy wrong :P


i'm not sure about the 'obama's war' angle though because:
i) it's dumb bipartisanship to blame 'obama' for it, rather than the 'us government' or 'polital elite' or whatever your favorite phrase for it is (NATO, the west, ZOG...)
ii) sarkozy and cameron pushed this harder than obama

The above article also lacks one detail that was posted here several months ago already, there was a paper leaked into public that stated that France and Britain had planned the invasion since at least last september.

Of course it would be more correct to label it ZOG, it is so much ZOG as it possibly gets, with both Cameron and Sarkozy being Jews. The Ombongo drive is still not that unclever, simply because he already got that funny Nobel Peace Prize. And it's also not entirely wrong.

The US finances since years all the Democrazy Movements around the world. The Orange Revolution, the Arab Spring (next is Birma/Asia btw), you name it. It's all well-known. To exclude the US from the culprits in Libya would miss the point. Just because Ombongo plays nice guy doesnt mean he is. The CIA is unquestionably there, the "future people's government" have ALL (except one who was in France) been at American universities and havent set one foot on Libyan ground for 20 years. The aircraft carriers are US ships. The helis are US stuff, the Jeeps are US stuff. And there are also white "rebels" in Libya. Now, it would be a bit funny to assume that all American soldiers went home after they've been in North Africa for years to "secure the trade routes" (right now there are no borders between the Arab Spring countries, its all wide open, also thanks to the NATO bombing), they can - and did - move freely into Libya from all sites to take over the students' protest and turned it into a civil war.

And I assume that the behind-the-scenes ZOG string pullers just decided to polish Ombongo's image (I mean, he just "lost" his proof for having killed Osama in an illegal invasion that froze up some diplomatic channels, to formulate it nicely) and have Britain and France do the public stunt for once.

Sure, it backfired, because the Blitzkrieg failed. They certainly did not expect Libya to resist so long, after it have been so easy in Egypt (too easy if you ask me). They wanted to play a bit war and win everything, now it looks as if they would lose everything. Gaddafi forces them to bomb the entire coast line where most of the industry is located. So they now have to bomb what they wanted to take over for free.

However, the people who pull the strings are the same people who financed the French, Bolshevik and American Revolution and about every Revolution since then: the American Jews and their banks = the ZOG base. Who poses for the fotos is perfectly irrelevant methinks :shrug

Akasha
Sunday, July 10th, 2011, 05:05 PM
Maybe time for some de-demonification...


Nxm-Z7_aVJQ

Very interesting video!!

Sorry if this video has been posted before.. i have to admit.. i have not seen this thread before...

EQ Fighter
Sunday, July 10th, 2011, 05:43 PM
Maybe time for some de-demonification...


Nxm-Z7_aVJQ

Very interesting video!!

Sorry if this video has been posted before.. i have to admit.. i have not seen this thread before...

Nelson Mandela as an "African National Congress" IE communist front group lackey.

So in that light as American Citizens, we did in fact fund the CIA and other Paramilitary groups during the Cold War to find ways of killing these sort of people off in a fast and efficient way.

An Interesting side note, would be how did he finance these improvements, because I'm almost positive the resources DID NOT come from western sources during the cold war.

That would most likely mean the funding was coming from the USSR, and at that time IE 1980's 1970's a the prime enemy of the United States.

The current conflect though is mostly about the west, including Europ and their ability to secure resources, Oil/Gas for their own security.

For Obama, it is just a political issue to be able to hold up the head of Gadaffi an old cold war enemy of the US as a trophy in the next election.

Lew Skannon
Thursday, July 14th, 2011, 12:05 AM
Probably the best speech I heard this year!

qNLqQ2cN-PA

velvet
Thursday, July 14th, 2011, 11:50 AM
Nelson Mandela as an "African National Congress" IE communist front group lackey.

So in that light as American Citizens, we did in fact fund the CIA and other Paramilitary groups during the Cold War to find ways of killing these sort of people off in a fast and efficient way.

Remember that Ghaddafi awarded his own "Peace Prize", that usually went to international terrorists, Mandela is in good company with Castro and others of that ilk.

And obviously, the US doesnt have much trouble with their existence, quite the opposite. Whereever there is massive drug trade (like Cuba, North Africa, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Zimbabwe and what have you), the CIA is not far away.

If the goal was to eradicate these sort of people, the CIA is the biggest failure ever in history. So think again.

An Interesting side note, would be how did he finance these improvements, because I'm almost positive the resources DID NOT come from western sources during the cold war.

That would most likely mean the funding was coming from the USSR, and at that time IE 1980's 1970's a the prime enemy of the United States.

Maybe you havent noticed, but the world consists of more than just the US and USSR. Ghaddafi has oil, and if I remember right, the video also mentioned that he put most of the revenues of the oil trade into his country's improvement.

And remember that it was "western war adventures" in Africa that placed Ghaddafi into the position where he was and is. Be sure that the funding did came from the west.

The current conflect though is mostly about the west, including Europ and their ability to secure resources, Oil/Gas for their own security.

You dont secure resources by bombing countries back into the stone age. And this isnt what any of these wars is about. These countries would sell you their oil and gas either way, what these wars are about is to force them to not charge transit fees, export taxes or whatever else spoils "free trade".

When Egypt nationalised the Suez Channel, it caused an "international panick crisis" - of the free-traders. That's when CIA and the "Democrazy NGOs" came into Egypt to prepare the "Arab Spring". The war in Afghanistan - or what the US dubbed the "war on terror" - was to force Afghanistan (with the "evil nationalists" Taleban, which were 100% funded by America against the former government) to allow the gas pipeline and dont charge a cent for transit fees, and to give US troops free land and hand to "protect" the pipeline, ie, be a constant threat to the government to remind them that this is not their pipeline, not even the part that runs through their country, and that the land where it goes over now is "international free trade zone" - where national laws and power dont exist anymore.


Now, like Rome, the US can deal with modern armies playing by rules and marching in line and order, but like Rome, the US has major trouble to deal with tribal structures. The result is that the "war on terror" goes on for ten years, the US spending is at 5.4 Trillion (plus interest rates counting into the millions per minute), the state debt has exploded, and together with all the other "security wars", is about to trash America itself.


America, the CIA etc, makes the same mistake over and over and over ad nauseam again. It funds any given group against another group to empower them, just to learn that every other people has a limit on what it is willing to take. When the Cold War ended, the US - this time in form of the WTO - started adventures in China. In the last 20 years, the "west" has funded Chinese economy, with the result that China is about to leave the US behind, it is already #2.

America is so broken, that another tiny blow will crash the American Dreamland - and the signs are already on the wall: Moody's has "threatened" the US govt with downrating them, which will result in that credits will have a higher interest rate (like Greece and the other CCC countries reaching 25% and more), and the Chinese rating agency understood how the game works, and said: if American pay-moral and ability will not improve asap, they will downrate US credibility. Even if the west doesnt fall into that tune, this means that all trade with the Eastern bloc (China, India, Russia, and because they're good friends, also Brazil, and all other Asian countries anyway) will see EXPLODED prizes. Problem for America is, that more than 20% of all trade is done in the far East. If China does how it says, the US is done.

And all this to "secure" trade-routes for private investors (who are on top mostly tax-freed to "support" the development countries - oh the fuckn irony) in order that they "safe" some transit fee Dollars and export taxes imposed on resources. Again, just the adventure in Afghanistan costed so far 5.4 Trillion. Think about what America could have done productive with this money.

Akasha
Tuesday, July 19th, 2011, 09:51 PM
I just realized after viewing some of the most horrific stuff I’ve ever seen on youtube that NATO actually supports monsters

See examples and of Rebel Atrocities In Libya…

WARNING: very terrible videos

http://www.youtube.com/user/VSMRK#g/c/BCB0450F9CB5D19C

Lew Skannon
Tuesday, July 19th, 2011, 10:00 PM
I just realized after viewing some of the most horrific stuff I’ve ever seen on youtube that NATO actually supports monsters


But the media is constantly telling us this this is the monster. Here he speaks to fellow arab
leaders in the arab league. I guess a couple of those attending are experiencing sleepless nights remembering the colonels words these days.. A bit like the old children song "10 little indians"..

VZZvPlGCt_8


Once again has the peoples of the world been played like pawns on the great chessboard of the psychopaths. When will we ever learn?

Akasha
Thursday, July 21st, 2011, 06:48 PM
Gp0HA5KEH_A

Why wasn't we shocked??

Haliaeetus
Wednesday, July 27th, 2011, 05:21 PM
But the media is constantly telling us this this is the monster. Here he speaks to fellow arab
leaders in the arab league. I guess a couple of those attending are experiencing sleepless nights remembering the colonels words these days.. A bit like the old children song "10 little indians"..

VZZvPlGCt_8


Once again has the peoples of the world been played like pawns on the great chessboard of the psychopaths. When will we ever learn?



Divide et impera!

paraplethon
Friday, August 12th, 2011, 02:45 AM
There's more to this than just oil...

Perhaps Libyas greatest crime on top of promotion of African unity were "three flagship projects: the African Investment Bank in Sirte, Libya, the creation as of 2011 of the African Monetary Fund, with a capital of US$42 billion with Yaounde, Cameroon, as headquarters and the African Central Bank with headquarters in Abuja in Nigeria. By supporting the development of the African Monetary Fund, Qadhafi had commited the crime of defying the International Monetary Fund, controlled by the US and Europe."

"No one defies the IMF"; so say the dogs of war.

Chlodovech
Thursday, August 25th, 2011, 04:17 PM
Was the CIA behind the Gaddafi oust?

by78CDL_ogY

Congressman Dennis Kucinch has suggested that the CIA has had a role in the start-up of the Arab Spring this year. Jack Rice, a journalist and former officer at the CIA himself, says it is not that unlikely at all.

“Let’s be honest,” Rice said to RT. “The CIA is involved in every place that they try to get involved in. They try to be on the ground in every major country in the region.”

“To deny is,” thinks Rice, “would be naive.”

Rice adds, however, that he thinks the relationship the United States has with the Middle East in general is one that is “very schizophrenic.” While the US insists on spreading democracy, he argues that America often acts hypocritical, saying one thing and doing another. While the US might be pushing for change, how does the country react when it isn’t the change they want?

Despite America’s encouragement for an uprising against Colonel Gaddafi’s rule in Libya, Rice says the consequences could turn out to be against what the US is actually in favor of. Rice posed the question of what will happen when those looting Gaddafi’s compound walk out with the weaponry the dictator had in his possession and wants to use it to enforce an Islamic rule that goes against what westerners want? Americans are pushing for stability, said Rice, but are they going to get it with the way they are handling it?

What we can expect, said Rice, is a shadow war typical of America. The US will move into the region and try to control it from the sidelines, hoping that they can install their ideals in a new country with new leadership, without necessarily putting a figurehead in the forefront.

Source (http://rt.com/usa/news/cia-gaddafi-rice-libya-936-087/)

Roderic
Wednesday, August 31st, 2011, 01:52 AM
BENGHAZI // It was one of Col Muammar Qaddafi's most prized projects, even bearing a name with the grandiosity the former Libyan leader is famous for: The Great Manmade River.

It makes up one of the largest freshwater supply networks in the world, with more than 2,820 kilometres of underground pipes pumping water from huge aquifers in the south of the country to coastal cities and desert towns.

Yet, despite its liquid wealth, more than half of the country is without running water and a humanitarian crisis is looming in Tripoli.

Christian Balslev-Olesen, Unicef's head in Libya, said 23,000 bottles of water had been delivered with another 90,000 bottles expected to arrive today.

"This could turn into an unprecedented health epidemic", he said.

Even the National Transitional Council, the interim government, appeared to be unaware of exactly why the western part of the country is running out of drinking water.

Rumours have swirled about the former regime sabotaging Tripoli's main source of water in Jebel Al Hasawinah, and even the poisoning of an underground reservoir further up the line.

Shamsiddin Ben Ali, a spokesman for the NTC, said yesterday that facilities had been sabotaged at Ash Shuwayrif and Sidi as Sayd.

But an official in the Great Manmade River Authority in Benghazi, Abdussalam Jehawi, said yesterday that the crisis was an unavoidable result of the battle to seize the capital last week. A combination of power outages, attacks on staff manning the water network and a backup reservoir being held hostage have led to the crisis.

The problems came within the first day of the battle. Tripoli had an 18-hour power outage that stopped pipeline pumps, cutting off the supply of new water.

But when power began flickering on again, the main station supplying Tripoli from Jebel Al Hasawinah was attacked by what his team described as African mercenaries and Qaddafi loyalists. The main supply of the water is near the city of Sabha, which is still under the former regime's control.

"Our staff were terrorised," said Mr Jehawi, a board member of the authority. The loyalists "stole their four-wheel drive vehicles, used machine guns, took all their food".

Pumps were switched off and staff could not get back inside to restart them.

To make matters worse, a site critical to the backup plan was also under the control of Qaddafi fighters.

The system was set up so that engineers can supply Tripoli with water from the east. But the facility where engineers can turn the water on is inside Sirte, Col Qaddafi's hometown and one of the last two holdouts of soldiers against the rebels.

If NTC fighters can take control of the city, the Great Manmade River can begin supplying Tripoli with 250,000 cubic metres of water per day - enough to cover about half the demand.

"This could be taken care of soon if Sabha and Sirte are taken by the rebels," Mr Jehawi said. "Until then, there is not much we can do."

It was unsurprising, he said, that Col Qaddafi and his followers would use the Great Manmade River as a tool to wreak havoc on the population.

During the initial phase of the fight in the east, regime forces hid tanks, artillery and other military assets inside a field full of unusable pipeline that was meant for the project. Those were destroyed by Nato air strikes.

Despite the huge practical purpose of the Great Manmade River, one of its major functions was to massage Col Qaddafi's ego. In speeches and demonstrations, the former leader called it the "Eighth wonder of the world" and exaggerated its cost to US$25 billion (Dh91.75bn). In fact, the total cost since the start in 1984 has been about $9.2bn (Dh33.88bn), with another $3.4bn planned to be spent for the completion of phase three in the western mountains, Mr Jehawi said.

Nevertheless, the project cost more than it should have because engineers were abruptly told in the middle of planning in the 1980s for the second phase to go around a huge tract of the desert known as Rabta, where Col Qaddafi was building a chemical weapons plant known as "Pharma 150", Mr Jehawi said.

"It's sad that we have this reputation among people as a Qaddafi project, as something he spent so much of the country's money on," Mr Jehawi said. "It really is an important project."

Libya needs water despite Qaddafi's Great Manmade River - The National (http://www.thenational.ae/news/worldwide/middle-east/libya-needs-water-despite-qaddafis-great-manmade-river)

DNAcECXLuxw

o-dgadkYIeA

KmjsBMExKJg

Lew Skannon
Wednesday, August 31st, 2011, 08:16 AM
Never Forgive, Never Forget

After covering Libya’s rape since last winter in dozens of articles, no forgiving or forgetting is possible for one of history’s great crimes.

Nor is ignoring those responsible, condemning them forthrightly, and explaining why all wars are waged.

NATO outdid Orwell on this one, killing truth by calling war the responsibility to protect – by terrorizing, attacking, and slaughtering civilians like psychopathic assassins.

As a result, honest historians will redefine barbarism to explain NATO’s savagery. It includes ongoing crimes of war and against humanity for the most malevolent reasons.

When is war not war? It’s when committing cold-blooded murder is called the right thing. When major media scoundrels cheerlead it, and when most people believe it because they’re too indifferent, uncaring or lazy to learn the truth.

NATO’s rape of Libya is too ugly for proper words to describe. Only honest images can do it, and lots of them.

Instead, the Big Lie substitutes for honest journalism, especially on television where real (not fake) visuals can show mangled bodies, mass destruction, and other evidence of NATO crimes.

Where civilian deaths can be shown graphically in living color. Where responsibility can be placed where it belongs. Where right and wrong can best be explained. Where repetition can arouse public outrage. Where proper analysis in advance perhaps can prevent all wars.

None are liberating, lawful, or virtuous. All are shamelessly exploitive. Libya’s one of the worst – unscrupulously benefitting powerful interests criminally, ruthlessly, and diabolically.

It doesn’t get any worse than that. Ask Lybians. They’ll explain.

Leading America’s Pack Journalistic Lying

The New York Times is America’s lead propaganda instrument, its reports getting enough global coverage to make a difference.

From the start, it cheerled war with Libya. It played the same role in Afghanistan, Iraq, and all previous US wars, deceiving its readers by dishonest journalism, commentaries, and editorials.

August 26 was no different. Two articles among others stand out. David Kirkpatrick wrote one headlined, “As Qaddafi Forces Retreat, a Newly Freed Imam Encourages Forgiveness,” saying:

Pro-NATO Sheik Abdul Ghani Aboughreis helped incite last winter’s uprising “with a fiery Friday sermon at the Mourad Agha mosque. His words sent thousands of demonstrators pouring into the streets. (His) mosque and neighborhood became a center of revolt and resistance….”

After six months of shamelessly supporting death and destruction against his own people, he now encourages “forgiv(ing) each other, to make sure to leave it to the law and not take revenge on each other.”

As in all his Libya war articles, Kirkpatrick left unexplained months of crimes of war and against humanity, committed by NATO and paramilitary killers.

Instead, he highlighted alleged evidence of ongoing Gaddafi loyalist crimes.

In times of war, both sides commit them, but whatever government forces did pale compared to NATO’s savagery and its hired assassins. Kirkpatrick and other Times writers failed to notice.

Anthony Shadid and Kareem Hahim were no better headlining, “Grim Evidence of Fighting’s Toll Becomes Clearer in Libya,” saying:

“As the fighting died down in Tripoli on Friday, the scope and savagery of the violence during the nearly weeklong battle for control of the capital began to come into sharper focus.”

Evidence he cites is a shameful Amnesty International report (based on freed Al Qaeda and other paramilitary prisoners), saying:

AI “uncovered evidence that forces loyal to (Gaddafi) have killed numerous detainees held at two military camps in Tripoli on 23 and 24 August.”

Perhaps so if other insurgents freed them, attacked Gaddafi forces in the process, and they fought back.

Instead, AI said:

“Loyalist forces in Libya must immediately stop such killings of captives, and both sides must commit to ensuring no harm comes to prisoners in their custody.”

Like UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, AI tries to have it both ways, ruining everything it gets right by reports like this – equating horrendous NATO crimes with lesser ones committed by Gaddafi forces, perhaps many less than imagined. The fog of war makes it hard to know precisely.

Instead, Shadid and Hahim’s article was shamelessly one sided. While citing clear evidence of rebel-committed atrocities, their article claimed:

* – Tripoli violence is now subsiding when, in fact, it rages;
* – rebels say Gaddafi loyalists killed their own, an absurdity on its face;
* – it’s hard “to ascertain the fate of….dead men” in hospitals, as well as chaos committed inside; AP and Reuters reported it resulted from rebel-committed terror;
* – Gaddafi’s “cloak of secrecy (and) mercurial rule” are being revealed, leaving unexplained why Washington and its NATO partners wage all wars;
* – slogans are being displayed, saying “Libya is free” and “Misurata is steadfast,” though still Gaddafi controlled, it’s believed, what Shadid and Hahim ignored, as well as not debunking claims of Libya’s freedom; and
* – documents in Gaddafi’s compound “seemed to show that (his) adopted daughter Hana, who was supposedly killed at age 4 in (1986), was alive (and) working as a doctor;” the key words “seemed to show” both Times writers implied were proof, adding that Tripoli Central Hospital workers claimed “a spacious and well-appointed office” there was hers.

Throughout the conflict, Times articles, op-eds and editorials backed it. Their unstated message is war is good, the more the better when America wages them.

Sadly, that’s the state of managed Western news and opinion. It’s a shocking indictment of its support for wealth and power, no matter how lawless and harmful to billions exploited ruthlessly, shameless, and repeatedly.

Final Comments

The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) reports continued fighting in Tripoli, inflicting many casualties.

Moreover, many injured can’t be treated because of ongoing violence, inadequate staff, and enough supplies and capacity at local hospitals.

In addition, “numerous arrests” were made, “including foreign nationals.” Their welfare is very much at risk, especially those singled out for revenge.

Fierce fighting also continues around Misrata and elsewhere. The end of conflict is nowhere in sight. Brega “look(s) like a ghost town.”

In different areas, people are endangered by unexploded ordinance, as well as shortages of food, clean water, drugs, other medical supplies, and spotty or no electricity.

Washington-led NATO turned Libya into a hellish inferno – step one before occupying and exploiting its resources and people. Months ago its wealth was stolen. Ahead will be its future if Libyans don’t struggle and win their freedom.

On August 26 on Russia Today (RT.com), journalist Pepe Escobar said Abdelhakim Belhadj, a former Al-Qaeda insurgent/now CIA asset commands rebel forces in Tripoli.

He explained that he was trained in Afghanistan by a “very hardcore Islamist Libyan group.” Earlier he was captured in Malaysia, detained and tortured in Bangkok, then transferred back to Libya and imprisoned.

In 2009, he made a deal for freedom, in return for serving Western interests, Escobar saying:

“I can say almost for sure with 95% certainty that this is the guy” heading insurgents in Tripoli.

It shows how Washington both demonizes and uses Al Qaeda advantageously, including bin Laden. He was a longtime CIA asset until his death in December 2001 – not from Obama’s staged raid.

Notably, Al Qaeda was a 1980s CIA creation during the Soviet-Afghan war. Moreover, Washington both supports international terrorism covertly and battles it by imperial wars and persecuting Muslims for their faith.

It’s part of the fog to scare people enough to believe waging wars remove threats that, in fact, don’t exist. So they have to be invented to enlist public support, unaware of the harm caused abroad and at home.

Only war profiteers benefit, not taxpayers they steal from or victims they attack. At the same time, corrosive militarism, financial wars, and other destructive policies destroyed America’s soul. Its future as a free country is next.

So focused on bread and circus distractions, most people don’t notice. How else can Washington get away with murder!

Finally, the fate of independent journalists trapped in Tripoli’s Corinthia Hotel remains unclear. They’re still in harm’s way because a chartered ship for their safe passage out either hasn’t arrived or it’s too unsafe to reach it.

Further updates will follow.

In conclusion, Law Professor Francis Boyle’s morning email said the following:

“After Six Months of fighting by the most powerful military alliance in the history of the world, Ghadafy has now become the Greatest African Warrior since Hannibal against the Romans – predecessors to the Americans.”

“Generations from now, people will sing songs, write poems, and compose odes to Ghadafy all over Africa, the Arab World, the Muslim World, and the Third World long after Obama is dead and disparaged and discredited.”

Sic transit Gloria mundi (Thus passes the glory of the world)!”

Keep Libya’s freedom flame alive no matter how imperial monsters try to destroy it!

We’re all Libyans now! Their struggle is ours!

It’s high time we matched their courageous spirit against the world’s most pernicious/destructive force.

Bowed perhaps, they’re not broken! Isn’t that enough to raise our consciousness enough to support them!

Source (http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/08/29/never-forgive-never-forget/)

Lew Skannon
Wednesday, August 31st, 2011, 06:21 PM
wHQR7yfgPE0&feature=player_embedded

Roderic
Sunday, September 4th, 2011, 09:43 PM
Libyan-Jewish exile David Gerbi, now in anti-Gaddafi outpost, heading to Tripoli to meet with National Transitional Council chairman.

ROME – David Gerbi, the international relations representative of the World Organization of Libyan Jews, is called “Udai ugrauli” (“the Jewish revolutionary”) by the Amazigh rebel leaders on the Libyan National Transitional Council in the country’s western Jebl Nafusa mountains.

The Amazigh (plural – Imazighen) as they prefer to be called, rebels, have embraced Gerbi in their midst, with special appreciation for his Jewish background.

Gerbi, a Jungian psychoanalyst and Libyan-Jewish exile living in Italy, has been to Libya on several missions over the past decade, driven by a desire to restore the two-millenniumold Jewish-Libyan heritage and return to his erstwhile home as a free citizen. The “Udai ugrauli” proudly displays his three legitimate identities: Italian, Libyan and Jewish. As Gerbi spoke with The Jerusalem Post via Skype from a rebel outpost in the mountains on Friday, gunshots could be heard in the distance.

After a week of volunteer service in the Benghazi Psychiatric Hospital last May, helping to treat victims of post-traumatic stress syndrome, Gerbi decided to cast his lot with the National Transitional Council rebels. He again left Italy and went to Tunis in August, where he met with Fahdel Hshad, an Amazigh whom David Gerbi met at the Benghazi Tibesti Hotel with the other NTC members.

Hshad, considered a great though humble leader, has lived exile for over 30 years, having been among the first in the opposition to refuse to recognize Muammar Gaddafi. This was his first trip home in three decades. Hshad and other Amazigh NTC members escorted Gerbi to the Amazigh town of Jadu in western Libya where, during World War II, Italian Fascists and others erected a concentration camp that interned 2,600 Jews.

Gerbi was warmly welcomed by the chairmen of town councils, all members of the NTC, respectively: Moussa Younes of Jado, Dr. Mustafa Razabani of Rajban and Tayeb Ahmed of Jefren along with the general population who recalled the good things their grandparents had told them about Jews.

Among many invitations, Gerbi “sat shiva” in mourning the Galiza family (200 members), sitting in a small circle on the floor with everyone eating from one plate.

Gerbi was brought to the Jewish Cemetery where headstones lie in disarray, with a couple of Hebrew inscriptions on fragments. He recited a symbolic Kaddish over Ner Neshamot (Yahrzeit candles) on a child’s tomb, lighting three candles in memory of the Jewish dead, including approximately 600 interned men, women and children who died of typhoid in the camp during WWII.

The Amazigh National Transitional Council members offered Gerbi the possibility of fencing off the cemetery and restoring the tombs.

They plan to organize an inauguration ceremony three months from now with the presence of a delegation of ten Jewish Libyans to form a Minyan. In return, the Amazigh members of the Libyan NTC will be invited as a pilgrimage delegation to Jerusalem.

“Our two peoples have much in common,” Mahmoud Tabib said. “We want to create closer relations between Muslims and Jews. Without Jews we will never be a strong country.”

He recalled stories of friendships with Jews he had heard from his grandparents and noted the Jewish kinship of names such as Ya’kub (Jacob), Jounis (Jonah), Moussa (Moses), Hannah, Zaccaria etc.

NTC spokesman Salem Badrani aims to “give voice to the voiceless” in the new constitution, inserting guarantees of respect for Amazigh language, culture and education that was repressed and prohibited by Gaddafi. The Amazigh feel they lived an experience similar to that of the Marranos, and have not succeeded in making themselves heard in the past. They now want to become visible, reclaiming full rights to their ancestral identity.

Gerbi plans to go to Tripoli and, with the help of his NTC rebel friends, meet with NTC leader Moustafa Abdel Jalil – who has already received a formal letter from the World Organization of Libyan Jews’s Kahlon naming Gerbi as the organization’s official representative and offering friendship, support, help, reconciliation and an exchange of visits.

http://www.jpost.com/MiddleEast/Article.aspx?id=236572