Monthly Archives: September 2011

John McCain goes abroad.

The end result of the people’s uprisings in Egypt and Tunisia; American companies, aided by America’s Congressmen, go in-country to open shop at preferred rates, while blithely ignoring unemployment in America.

One might almost think the uprisings were co-opted or something. Assuming one thinks about such things, or indeed, that one thinks at all. One day soon, American’s wages will be driven to a low enough point that American companies will consider investing in America. All we need is a little bankruptcy, an IMF loan program, no social security, and no minimum wage laws.


From article, June 22: Top senators John McCain and John Kerry will accompany a delegation of US business leaders on Friday to Tunisia and Egypt to discuss economic opportunities in the North African countries, McCain’s office said.

McCain, a Republican, and Kerry, a Democrat, will visit the two countries with General Electric CEO Jeff Immelt, along with officials from Boeing, Coca-Cola, Bechtel, ExxonMobil, Marriot and Dow, confirmed McCain’s office on Wednesday.

On Friday, the delegation planned to meet with current Tunisian Prime Minister Beji Caid Essebsi, and representatives from the business community.

The group will then head to Egypt on Saturday and Sunday, where they will meet Prime Minister Essam Charaf, the head of Egypt’s Armed Forces Marshal Mohamed Hussein Tantawiand, and Egyptian business leaders. They will also visit the Cairo Stock Exchange and a Coca-Cola factory.

The visit comes as the two lawmakers join Independent Senator Joe Lieberman in sponsoring a bill to create economic assistance funds for Egypt and Tunisia, both rocked with popular unrest and subsequent regime change in recent months.

The purpose of the funds is to provide capital to local entrepreneurs in the hope of creating “thousands of jobs,” which both countries desperately need, said Kerry, who chairs the US Senate Committee on Foreign Relations.

In proposing the bill, the elected officials urged the United States to back the revolutionary movements across the region known as the “Arab Spring.”

The money, tens of millions of dollars, would be provided by funds already allocated to the US State Department.


And yesterday, we see that Libya’s “revolution” will likewise end up being a big winnah for America’s corporations, as represented by…John McCain and some friends in the Senate.  The difference is that while the people of Egypt and Tunisia had spontaneously arisen to protest their governments and the living conditions imposed on them, with the US now taking advantage of those situations (which the people in those countries may realize soon enough), in Libya the US and some other key NATO countries instigated an “uprising” in order to plunder Libya via a more direct route.


…On Thursday, Senators John McCain of Arizona and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and two other Republican members of the US Senate visited Libya, the highest level US delegation to arrive in the country since the beginning of the NATO war last March.

The purpose of the visit was clear: profits. As the Associated Press reported, “The senators said American companies are hoping to tap into the wealth of oil and natural resources in Libya, which under Gaddafi long faced sanctions that prohibited much business.”

“There is a desire here by the Libyan people to make sure that those who helped get paid back,” Graham told reporters in Tripoli. McCain added, “I think American investors are more than eager to come invest here in Libya and we hope and believe that they will be given an opportunity to do so.”…


The siege on Sirte, Libya

Scott Taylor of the Chronicle-Herald wrote on 15 Aug. ’11:

On a fact-finding trip into Tripoli last week, I saw first-hand that Gadhafi has solidified his control over the capital and most of western Libya. Foreign diplomats still based in Tripoli confirmed to me that, since NATO started bombing, Gadhafi support and approval ratings have actually soared to about 85 per cent.

Of the 2,335 tribes in Libya, over 2,000 are still pledging their allegiance to the embattled president. At present, it is the gasoline shortage due to the embargo and lack of electricity from NATO’s bombing that are causing the most hardship to Libyans inside Gadhafi-controlled sectors.

However, at present, the people still blame NATO — not Gadhafi — for the shortages. In an effort to combat that sentiment and to encourage a popular uprising against Gadhafi, NATO planes have taken to dropping leaflets in canisters over the streets of Tripoli.

Unfortunately for the NATO planning staff, the canisters are heavy enough to cause injury and damage roofs when they plummet to the ground.

As for the messages on the leaflets, the Libyans are quite amused at the clumsy translations. On one such note, the intended slogan is meant to urge civilians to go forward and “embrace” the rebels. Instead, it translates to encourage Libyans to go out and “copulate” with the rebels.

Another NATO missive was intended to advise those living within Gadhafi’s sector to pack up and move to a rebel-occupied territory. This somehow became garbled into a request for citizens to relocate to a “possessed” (as in, by the devil) area of Libya.

17 June ’11; one million Libyans in Tripoli demonstrate in favor of Ghaddafi and against NATO.  One of many such protests.  (Libya has a population of 6 million.) Video.!

Press TV talks with Lizzie Phelan, journalist and political activist in London who has been to Libya and says that Western media is complicit in war crimes in the North African country through omission of fact and that the vast majority of the population are in support of the Libyan government. Following is a transcript of the interview.

Update on the siege on Sirte.  The “rebels” are intent on killing every civilian who supports or ever has supported Ghaddafi.  Apparently, so is NATO.


Refugees from the Libyan coastal city of Sirte report that thousands have died as a result of relentless NATO bombardment and shelling by the the Western-backed “rebels.”

The two-week-old NATO siege of Sirte has left the city without adequate food, drinkable water, medicine and other basic necessities of life, creating hellish condition for its population of 100,000…

In their frustration, the anti-Gaddafi militias have pounded the coastal city with artillery and mortar rounds, tank shells and Grad rockets, wreaking horrific destruction.

Thousands of refugees have tried to flee the city, forced to pass through checkpoints set up by the NATO-backed forces, where many have been taken prisoner, accused of being Gaddafi supporters.

The Wall Street Journal reported from one of these checkpoints, describing lines of cars and trucks, packed with civilians and piled with mattresses and other belongings:

“As refugees gathered, the Misrata fighters checked their names against lists of suspected Gaddafi loyalists. Some men were arrested while others were told to wait on the side of the road with their families…

Reports from inside the city indicate a deepening humanitarian catastrophe. The aid group Medecins Sans Frontieres (MSF—Doctors Without Borders) reported Wednesday that it had been in touch with doctors at the main hospital in Sirte, who were facing an increasingly impossible situation.

“If the situation continues for a few more days or weeks, it will be catastrophic. Already the doctors in the hospital can’t do their work properly, and if it persists, the situation will become dramatic,” Dr. Mego Terzian, head of emergency programs for MSF-France, told the Reuters news agency.

“They said the hospital was overwhelmed with wounded,” said Terzian. “There are other kinds of emergencies—pediatric, gynecological and patients with chronic diseases who are not receiving treatment.

“They told us of huge difficulties, a lack of electricity, water and basic medicines to run the emergency room, including anesthetics, antibiotics, analgesics, and blood bags,” he told Reuters.

The MSF representative said that the doctors in Sirte had contacted the group asking for emergency medical supplies, but that the National Transitional Council had “forbidden” MSF volunteers from crossing through its siege lines to aid the population.

Terzian said that the group was investigating whether it could bring in supplies by sea, but that it was not optimistic. NATO warships are maintaining a blockade of Libya’s Mediterranean coast, which is an integral part of the barbaric siege of Sirte…

Another doctor,… Eman Mohammed, reported that the hospital had no oxygen in the operating rooms and few staff members to treat patients.

Lack of food, water, electricity and other basic necessities is also taking its toll on the general population, particularly the city’s children. Reporting from a clinic in the town of Harawa, just a few miles outside of Sirte, AFP said that large numbers of families were bringing in young children suffering from severe diarrhea and vomiting.

“Most patients coming to me are children,” Valentina Rybakova, a Ukrainian doctor who has worked in Libya for eight years, told AFP. “I saw 120 patients since morning and 70 percent of them were children. This is a big humanitarian crisis. We are trying to get help from everybody, but the main problem is that these people have no access to clean drinking water.” She said that her clinic, too, was suffering from a shortage of medicines, as well as critical lack of nursing staff.

“The situation in the city is very critical,” Muftah Mohammed, a fish trader who was leaving Sirte, told AFP. “Children are in a particularly bad condition. There is no milk for them. We have all been surviving on just macaroni for several days.”

“There is no food, there is no medicine, and every night, for five or six hours, NATO bombs all sorts of buildings,” Sami Abderraman, 64, told the Spanish daily El Pais as he sought to leave Sirte. “Hundreds of women and children have died like animals.” Abderraman estimated that as many as 3,000 people have been killed in the siege…

Riab Safran, 28, spoke to the Times of London as his car was being searched at a rebel roadblock outside of Sirte. “It was worse than awful,” he said. “They hit all kinds of buildings—schools, hospitals.” ..

Ali Omar, who fled the city with 27 members of his extended family, recounted the carnage being carried out by the NATO-backed rebels advancing on Sirte from Benghazi in the east.

A number of the refugees have told reporters that those remaining in the city feared violence at the hands of the “rebels” after reports of many of those fleeing being detained and of women being abducted from cars leaving the city.

Among the most fearful are refugees who fled Tawergha, a town about 25 miles south of Misrata whose population is composed predominantly of black Libyans. Anti-Gaddafi militias charged that the residents of Tawergha had participated in the siege of Misrata by government troops and have retaliated with wholesale ethnic cleansing. Houses and stores in the town have been burned and daubed with racist graffiti. The new authorities in Misrata have announced plans to bulldoze the entire town so that none of Tawergha’s residents can ever return.

It is estimated that as many as 5,000 refugees from Tawergha sought safety in Sirte and now fear that they will be slaughtered by the militia forces attacking the city from Misrata to the west. Tawergha refugees who have managed to flee the fighting for Tripoli have found no refuge there either. Misrata militias manning checkpoints in the capital have detained them and thrown them into prison camps, accusing them of being “mercenaries.”…

Since launching the war on Libya last March, NATO has conducted 24,140 sorties, including 9,010 strike sorties, leaving much of the country in ruins and thousands killed and wounded…British, French, US and Qatari special operations troops, intelligence operatives and mercenary military contractors have organized, trained and armed the “rebel” armies, whose every advance has been made possible by NATO bombardments…

Endnote: By early Sept., the White House had put the cost of the Libyan war at 1.1 billion.

Leave a comment

Posted by on September 29, 2011 in Libya


Libya, as scheduled. (updated)

One of the first buildings bombed by NATO in Libya was the (nationalized) Central Bank of Libya.  The overseas assets in this bank were worth roughly 150 billion dollars, which were frozen as part of the NATO/UN sanctions before the ‘humanitarian intervention’.  NATO countries now hold 100 b of those funds.  Before the freezing of the funds, the money was owned by the people of Libya.  Before the intervention, Libya had no debt.
Before the intervention, schools, hospitals, and health care were offered free of cost to the Libyan people.  The literacy rate was 89% and the teacher to student ratio was 1 – 17. Ghaddafi had put price controls on food products into effect so that hunger issues stemming from the rising cost of staples didn’t affect the population as it had in Egypt and Tunisia.
Now that NATO has hit residential areas, schools, hospitals, the water supply lines and electric facilities with tens of thousands of bomb strikes, Libya’s infrastructure is in tatters.  Depleted uranium lies all over the country, seeping into waterways and the soil.  In August, UNICEF warned that the bombing of Libya’s water system could turn into an “unprecedented health epidemic”.  Libya needs to rebuild itself.  The way this is done now [see: Iraq] is not through reparations from the invading countries to the beleaguered nation; after destroying the infrastructure of a country, the decimated country itself is expected to pay for its own reconstruction, usually via loans from the IMF and World Bank.  In Libya, this is especially poignant, as Libya would have had enough cash to rebuild itself (now that it is customary for the invaded to pay for their invasion) had the US and other NATO countries not stolen its sovereign wealth.

Based on evolving events in Libya and the views of member countries, the World Bank today announced that it is engaging with the National Transitional Council (NTC) as the Government of Libya.

As Libya begins its recovery from conflict, the World Bank has been asked to lead the effort in the areas of public expenditure and financial management, infrastructure repair, job creation for young people and service delivery.

The World Bank joins the United Nations and the European Union as one of the three institutions invited by Libya’s National Transitional Council (NTC) to coordinate assistance for the north African nation as it forges a path forward after months of violent conflict.

Specifically, the Bank has been asked to examine the need for repair and restoration of services in the water, energy and transport sectors and, in cooperation with the International Monetary Fund, to support budget preparation and help the banking sector back on to its feet. Employment generation for young Libyans has been added as an urgent need facing the country.

In other words, the World Bank, IMF and other “donors” will lend back to the Libyan people, at high interest rates, some of the money that was stolen from them to rebuild the infrastructure which NATO destroyed.  Instead of a creditor nation, which Libya was, it will now be a debtor nation.  As an added bonus, the newly-formed African Union bank, set up in Cameroon with its original funding from Ghaddafi, formed specifically to pay off IMF debts owed by some of the other African countries, has also been destroyed by the seizing of Libya’s assets.  The next step [see:Iraq, etc.], is for multi-national companies, rather than local Libyans, to be awarded no-bid contracts for the rebuilding.

This is what we think is better for Libyans than what they had.


I must say, this is happening more rapidly than even I anticipated. (I thought it might take another month before the vultures began picking the still alive body.) Note the final paragraph and remember that this is not a “war” according to Oblahblah and did not have Congressional approval.

“US, European corporations rush to secure cut from Libyan war”

Backed by the US and European governments that have spearheaded the military intervention into Libya, transnational corporations are now scrambling to secure lucrative oil deals, construction contracts, export opportunities and other profit-making openings in the war-ravaged North African state.

The New York Times last Thursday reported that the returned US ambassador to Libya, Gene Cretz, had briefed reporters following a ceremonial flag-raising at the reopened embassy in Tripoli. Cretz explained that about a week after the so-called rebel fighters had won control of the Libyan capital, he participated in a State Department conference call involving executives from about 150 American companies interested in the new opportunities created by the NATO-led bombardment.

“We know that oil is the jewel in the crown of Libyan natural resources,” Cretz reportedly later explained to journalists, “but even in Qaddafi’s time they were starting from A to Z in terms of building infrastructure and other things … If we can get American companies here on a fairly big scale, which we will try to do everything we can to do that, then this will redound to improve the situation in the United States with respect to our own jobs.”

Cretz’s claim that “jobs” will be generated through Libyan contracts is absurd—the real purpose of getting “American companies here on a fairly big scale” is to generate profits…

The New York Times report on Cretz’s statement noted that it was “a rare nod to the tacit economic stakes in the Libyan conflict for the United States and other Western countries.” After reporting the ambassador’s claim that oil was never the “predominant reason” for the intervention, the Times nevertheless admitted that “his comments underlined the American eagerness for a cut of any potential profits.”

The September 15 visit to Tripoli by British Prime Minister David Cameron and French President Nicolas Sarkozy pointed to the intensified scramble among the NATO allies for control of Libya’s natural resources.

A week before Sarkozy went to Libya, Medef International, which represents the interests of French companies overseas, convened a conference titled, “The National Transitional Council and its Projects.” The event was attended by about 400 senior executives from firms including oil company Total, energy firm GDF Suez and car producer Peugeot, as well as what Reuters described as other “top names in the Paris CAC-40, law firms, architects, the postal service, wheat companies, printers, tobacco firms, and insurance firms.” French Trade Minister Pierre Lellouche attended, together with a representative of the NTC.

Medef International Director General Thierry Courtaigne spelled out what was at stake. Estimating the value of reconstruction opportunities over the next ten years as at least $200 billion, Courtaigne warned: “There will be stiff competition . . . Italian, American, English, so the French package has to be perfectly targeted, prepared and competitive.” He made clear that because Sarkozy had led the assault on Libya, French corporations were in a strong position, but he warned against complacency. “It’s interesting to see that France is benefiting from a favourable environment after what the president did,” he declared, “however, let’s be clear the market is not there to be taken but to be won.”

Sarkozy’s trade minister was no less frank. “The president took political and military risks, and all that creates an environment where the Libyan authorities and the people know what debt they owe France,” he declared. “We aren’t going to be embarrassed by helping our companies benefit from this advantage.”

A Reuters report on the Medef International event noted: “Some French firms are already doing business with Libya’s new rulers. Grain firm Soufflet has signed contracts to supply wheat worth about $22 million and Courtaigne said others like telecommunications provider Alcatel-Lucent and pharmaceuticals firm Sanofi were now working in Libya.”…

NATO is continuing to bombard the last remaining anti-NTC holdouts, centred on the towns of Sirte and Bani Walid…

According to Al Jazeera, a Gaddafi spokesman reported that “several hundred” civilians have been killed in Sirte. Reports are emerging of a terrible humanitarian crisis in the town. One resident, Abdul Nasser Sadiq, told the Independent that there was “no food, no electricity, no nothing.”

NATO leaders last Wednesday authorised another 90-day extension of its Libyan campaign, raising the prospect of ongoing air strikes and other military operations throughout the rest of 2011, unless the pro-Gaddafi forces capitulate.


This is what we think is better for Libyans than what they had.

Leave a comment

Posted by on September 24, 2011 in Libya, MIC, Wall St and banks


UN membership; al Qaeda in Libya vs. Palestine

So the US doesn’t want Palestine to have full membership in the UN, but doesn’t mind giving al Qaeda in Libya a seat.  It seems very few people in the media find this odd or note-worthy.  Has a new “government” ever garnered such legitimacy so quickly in the eyes of the world?  And yet, Libya’s new “government” is wracked with in-fighting, with at least three factions claiming dominance.  When the UN says it is giving membership rights to the new government in Libya, the question begs to be asked: exactly who will show up at the next UN general assembly?  Not to mention the fact that the NATO countries are still engaged in a massive bombing campaign, the war that Obama and NATO started is not over, Ghaddafi is actually still alive and at large and technically still the leader of a sovereign nation – how can the UN seat a “government” that only exists because some of the NATO nations, mainly those of Sarkozy, Cameron, and Obama, broke international law?


The United Nations has approved a seat for al-Qaeda at the globalist forum. From the Associated Press:

The U.N. General Assembly voted Friday to give Libya’s seat in the world body to the former rebels’ National Transitional Council which led the rebellion that ousted Moammar Gadhafi.

The resolution was approved Friday by a vote of 114-17 with 15 abstentions, revealing divisions in Africa and Latin America over who should represent Libya.

The so-called National Transitional Council includes members connected to al-Qaeda., Prison and others, including historian author Webster Tarpley, have pointed out the fact that NATO contrived rebels are dominated by al-Qaeda and CIA created anti-Gaddafi groups such as the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group. The leader of the group, Abdel hakim Belhaj, is linked to the CIA and al-Qaeda.

The corporate media has all but ignored the fact that Khalifa Haftar, who was appointed chief rebel commander March 17, is a long-time CIA collaborator.

Warnings about arming and supporting the al-Qaeda linked rebels have come from all quarters, including Russia, China, Turkey and even the Pope…

Those CIA guerrillas have now gained international cachet and legitimacy at the United Nations as NATO continues to bomb civilians in Libya and press for the arrest or assassination of Gaddafi…

Venezuela accused NATO forces of carrying out “criminal air raids … in order to install a puppet government.”

The General Assembly’s credentials committee unanimously recommended that al-Qaeda be seated, although Southern Africa’s main regional bloc opposed giving the National Transitional Council credentials. It failed to win support to defer a vote.

The vote means al-Qaeda will speak for Libya at next week’s ministerial meeting of the General Assembly.


Stephen Lendman at also noticed the hypocritical juxtaposition of these two stories and discusses it in this story.

Washington supports a UN seat for the illegitimate Transitional National Council (TNC) Libyan government.

Obama vows to veto a Palestinian bid for statehood and full de jure UN membership.

Imperial America’s wrong over right agenda takes center stage across North Africa, the Middle East and Central Asia.  Death, destruction, and immiseration take precedence over rule of law principles and norms.

It’s no different at home where political leaders favor wealth and power interests over working households, struggling to cope during America’s greatest Depression.

Imperial arrogance and hypocrisy define Washington’s contempt for human and civil rights, as well as other core democratic values. Almost daily it reaches for new heights.

On September 16, New York Times writer Neil MacFarquhar headlined, “UN Takes Steps to Assist Libya’s Transitional Leaders,” saying:

The “Security Council lift(ed) some economic sanctions and the General Assembly accept(ed) the credentials of the (Illegitimate) transitional government to represent Libya in the world body.”

Reuters said Washington “welcome(d the) vote. Vow(ed) to be ‘friend’ of Libya.”

UN ambassador Susan Rice said Tripoli will have “a friend and partner in the United States. The Libyan people still have much more work to do, but they also have the full knowledge that the international community, including the United States, stands ready to help their transition towards democracy, prosperity, and the rule of law.”

In fact, Washington plans colonization, occupation, plunder, and exploitation. Libya is now wholly owned by America and its imperial partners.

Democracy, rule of law principles, and general prosperity won’t be tolerated.  Only favored elitist interests will benefit. That’s what all wars are about, not freedom and a new beginning for liberated people.

Seventeen countries voted against UN membership. Venezuela’s UN Ambassador, Jorge Valero, perhaps spoke for others, saying:

Caracas rejects the “illegitimate transitory authority imposed by foreign intervention” and any attempt to make Libya a NATO or Security Council “protectorate.”

It’s already a colony to be brutally exploited like wherever imperial America shows up.

Cuban UN Ambassador Pedro Nunez Mosquera said NATO conducted “a military operation to change the regime to promote their political and economic interests.”

On September 20, Obama will welcome TNC head Mustafa Jalil in New York at the UN. He’ll also meet there with other imperial partners to discuss how to carve up their new trophy property.

White House deputy national security advisor Ben Rhodes describes it as “US support (for) the type of Libya we’d like to see going forward.”

He barely concealed what he means, calling Libya a “success” story. Millions now suffering there might disagree. For them, in fact, the worst is yet to come.

A previous article discussed planned peacekeeper occupation of Libya, accessed through the following link:

On September 16, the Security Council authorized a “UN Support Mission in Libya (UNSMIL),” without explaining its another illegal imperial occupation against the wishes of Libyans wanting freedom, peace, and right to govern their own affairs.

Instead they’ll get paramilitary brutality, mass rapes, and sex trafficking, as well as other atrocities and crimes against humanity.

They’re commonplace wherever Blue Helmets show up. They come as enforcers, not peacekeepers. They serve powerful interests, not those of people they’re sworn to protect.

Libyans will soon taste what 16 other countries endure, including DRC Congo, Sudan, Kosovo, Rwanda, and Haiti where local people hate them and want them out. However, they have no say or rights. Their choice is obey or else.

Libya v. Palestine

Partnered with Israel, Washington won’t tolerate Palestinian statehood and full UN membership. Note the contrast. TNC-led Libya has no legitimacy. Yet it easily got UN membership.

Palestinians have waited 63 years for their legitimate rights. …


Leave a comment

Posted by on September 19, 2011 in Haiti, Libya


Libya: a practice run.

Sarkozy and Cameron visited Tripoli yesterday.  Gen Carter Ham, the commander of the Pentagon’s Africa Command (AFRICOM), was also present and made comments.  Note that the following quotes were issued publicly in speeches; these are not ‘anonymous government official who declined to be identified’ hints as to what they mean:

In his speech in Tripoli, Cameron stressed that the NATO war on the country would continue. “There are still parts of Libya under Gaddafi’s control, Gaddafi is still at large, and we must make sure this work is completed,” said Cameron. “We must keep up with the NATO mission until civilians are all protected and this work is finished.”

The pretense that the “NATO is protecting civilians becomes more absurd each day. As Cameron spoke, NATO warplanes bombed the towns of Sirte and Bani Walid. NATO’s massive fire power is being used to enable the “rebels” to carry out the kind of siege of these population centers that the Western alliance initially claimed it was intervening to stop pro-Gaddafi forces from carrying out in Benghazi.

[My note: Sirte and Bani Walid are 2 of the several civilian towns under siege.  Electricity and water have been cut off.  The rebels asked NATO to simply strafe the towns into dust to save them the trouble of sorting the pro-Ghaddfi civilians from the pro-rebel civilians.  It appears that NATO has decided to start with this procedure.  On 10 Sept, residents of Bani Walid testified that chemical weapons such as mustard gas were being used by NATO in their town and sent out a plea for help.]

Cameron added that Britain would …deploy a team of British military “advisers” to assist the NTC.

There has been widespread speculation in the media that the Sarkozy government would cash in on being the first to recognize the NTC and the first to begin bombing Libya, with the French oil giant Total emerging as the number one beneficiary…Though fighting continues in Libya and there are signs that the NATO-sponsored regime change may produce a new civil war, both Sarkozy and Cameron suggested in their speeches Thursday that the Libyan war provided a new model for imperialist interventions.

In his remarks, Sarkozy issued a veiled threat that Syria could be the next target. “I dream that one day young Syrians will be as lucky as the young Libyans today, that one day they will also be able to say: ‘democracy and a peaceful revolution are for us.’”

Meanwhile, the commander of the Pentagon’s Africa Command (AFRICOM) made it clear that the US military sees the Libyan war as the prelude to new imperialist wars in the region. Gen. Carter Ham indicated that AFRICOM’s role in the Libyan intervention had been something of a baptism by fire for a command that had been largely dedicated to military assistance missions and attempts to find bases for US military forces on the African continent.

“Dropping bombs and Tomahawks, those kind of things, was not something the command had practiced to the degree we were required to do” in Libya, he said. “The question for us now is how do we sustain that so that if we would have to do this again, we’d start at a higher plateau.”

Ham also said that he wanted to secure more special operations forces for AFRICOM to conduct “counterterrorism” operations in Africa. He pointed to three groups that he said posed a threat: Al-Shabab in East Africa, the Nigeria-based Boko Haram and Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM).

This last group, AQIM, had merged in 2007 with the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group from which much of the leadership of the NATO-backed rebel forces in Libya are drawn.

Ham voiced concern about reports that portable surface-to-air missiles from the Gaddafi regime’s stockpile had gone missing as a result of the US-NATO war. He also said that Washington and NATO had to ensure that the Islamist elements that they have armed and supported do not “reemerge to be part of the interim government or subsequent government.”

[My note: Somehow, the rebels have managed to get hold of 20,000 surface to air missiles.  Kucinich mentioned this as a major concern in his speech on Libya last week, saying, “West­ern of­fi­cials, per­haps the same ge­niuses who know­ingly helped Libyan rebels with ties to Al Qaeda over­throw the Libyan gov­ern­ment, are now wor­ried the sur­face to air mis­siles and other weapons will get into the wrong hands”.]

Leave a comment

Posted by on September 16, 2011 in Libya, MIC


Summary of Libyan war.

If you want to understand what we doing in Libya, please watch this brief (2-minute) cartoon, which explains US wars everywhere at this point in our history.  This was written and produced by former Chief Economist, John Perkins, and explains how our current system of capitalism works globally.

The only caveat in applying this cartoon to Libya is that Libya had already nationalized its oil resources and national bank and was not in debt to the IMF or World Bank.  The fact that Ghaddafi was not in debt and had initiated the basis for an independent African Bank to free some of the other African nations of their IMF servitude is what impelled NATO to go to war against Libya.  There is no doubt that once the NATO countries succeed in finally killing Ghaddafi, the country of Libya will be required to take IMF loans in order to rebuild their infrastructure (which NATO destroyed) – every country on the planet can safely assume that once its infrastructure is destroyed by US armament, it will be obliged to pay for its own reconstruction through forced participation in IMF and World Bank loans, just as though their country had been wrecked purposefully by themselves or through some unexpected “act of God”.  As we can clearly see by the facts that Libya’s oil fields are already being divied up amongst favored oil companies and its nationalized bank’s assets immediately seized and shortly thereafter redistributed, the cartoon linked above holds true for the eventual outcome for Libya.

Then read this article from Maximilian Forte, “The Top Ten Myths in the War Against Libya”.

A brief quote from the Forte article:

…To say that the current turn in Libya represents a victory by the Libyan people in charting their own destiny is, at best, an oversimplification that masks the range of interests involved since the beginning in shaping and determining the course of events on the ground, and that ignores the fact that for much of the war Gaddafi was able to rely on a solid base of popular support. As early as February 25, a mere week after the start of the first street protests, Nicolas Sarkozy had already determined that Gaddafi “must go”. By February 28, David Cameron began working on a proposal for a no-fly zone—these statements and decisions were made without any attempt at dialogue and diplomacy. By March 30, The New York Times reported that for “several weeks” CIA operatives had been working inside Libya, which would mean they were there from mid-February, that is, when the protests began—they were then joined inside Libya by “dozens of British special forces and MI6 intelligence officers”. The NYT also reported in the same article that “several weeks” before (again, around mid-February), President Obama Several “signed a secret finding authorizing the CIA to provide arms and other support to Libyan rebels,” with that “other support” entailing a range of possible “covert actions”. USAID had already deployed a team to Libya by early March. At the end of March, Obama publicly stated that the objective was to depose Gaddafi. In terribly suspicious wording, “a senior U.S. official said the administration had hoped that the Libyan uprising would evolve ‘organically,’ like those in Tunisia and Egypt, without need for foreign intervention”—which sounds like exactly the kind of statement one makes when something begins in a fashion that is not “organic” and when comparing events in Libya as marked by a potential legitimacy deficit when compared to those of Tunisia and Egypt. Yet on March 14 the NTC’s Abdel Hafeez Goga asserted, “We are capable of controlling all of Libya, but only after the no-fly zone is imposed”—which is still not the case even six months later.

In recent days it has also been revealed that what the rebel leadership swore it would oppose—“foreign boots on the ground”—is in fact a reality confirmed by NATO: “Special forces troops from Britain, France, Jordan and Qatar on the ground in Libya have stepped up operations in Tripoli and other cities in recent days to help rebel forces as they conducted their final advance on the Gadhafi regime”. This, and other summaries, are only scratching the surface of the range of external support provided to the rebels. The myth here is that of the nationalist, self-sufficient rebel, fueled entirely by popular support….

Leave a comment

Posted by on September 10, 2011 in fossil fuels, Libya, MIC, Wall St and banks


The rebels in Libya and ethnic cleansing.

The CIA/al Qaeda/NATO-led rebels in Libya are indulging in what would be called ‘ethnic cleansing’ had it taken place under Ghaddafi.  It did not happen under Ghaddafi, of course, because he welcomed black Africans from other nations who came to Libya seeking jobs.  Under Ghaddafi, these blacks were given employment as migrant workers or in his armed forces; much like the US seeks to do with the Dream Act, a bill that grants citizenship to immigrants (in a very specific age range) if they serve a certain number of years in our military.

The rebels hate the black Africans, who represent roughly 1/5 of Libya’s population, and have been rounding them up into detention camps or simply slaughtering them where they stand.  The western media is making a feeble attempt to blame some of the massacres on Ghaddafi, an accusation laughable on its face, as he has always been known for his love of the black African community.  Whatever else the man has done in his lifetime, one cannot in clear conscious accuse him of racial prejudice toward black Africans.  The rebels – the NTC – have been named as the de facto government of Libya by the NATO countries and this is their first official “act” as the new leaders there.  While the UN and various aid organizations warn of the need for humanitarian aid and dire shortages of medicine, food and water, entirely created by the effects of NATO bombing of towns and infrastructures, no-one seems to have the honesty to call the current actions of the NTC by its proper term: ethnic cleansing.  Furthermore, the NTC – loosely affiliated with al Qaeda, remember – now has control of missiles that Ghaddafi held in previously secure facilities.

This is what we think is better for Libya than what they had.

35,000 NATO bombs dropped on Libya, many containing depleted uranium.  50,000 dead.

This is what we think is better for Libya than what they had.

From CNN, 8 Sept., 2011

Away from Tripoli, away from the fighting and largely away from any aid, hundreds of immigrants are living in an abandoned harbor.

They are living on scraps, in poor sanitary conditions, and fearful of being mistakenly identified as mercenaries who fought for the ousted Libyan leader Colonel Moammar Gadhafi.

In one cooking pot a chicken lies at least a quarter covered in flies. Until recently there has only been salt water available. And there are dark tales of women being dragged away in the middle of the night to be raped by armed gangs.

An estimated 1,200 men, women and children have turned the upturned fishing boats at Janzour harbor into a makeshift camp of tents and boats.

Pretty much all of them are black Sub-Saharan African immigrants who moved to Libya for casual or manual jobs, from places like Chad, Ghana, Nigeria or Mail.

Now their skin color is making them a target for the new power in town who say black Africans also came to Libya to fight as mercenaries for Gadhafi. During the fighting CNN has interviewed such fighters on several occasions.

Under Libya’s searing daytime heat they wait at Janzour for help and a way out.

When the fighting first reached Tripoli, these immigrants say they left for the quiet harbor area about 15 kilometers out of the capital. They hoped aid would come in through Janzour and possibly a route home, or at least a boat out of Libya.

But they were left to fend for themselves. Only last week did Red Cross aid, including drinking water and soap, get to them.

One woman says she has seen armed men pick out women and take them away to be raped. Others at Janzour told CNN similar stories…

The International Red Cross knows the problem but can’t promise a solution. Spokesman Souad Messaoudi said: “We have submitted a report with recommendations and we remind all parties that it is very important to respect these people and protect these people.”

Libya’s African immigrants are a legacy of Gadhafi’s rule and his pan-African ambitions, not just his desperate fight for survival this year.

He invested millions of dollars into Sub-Saharan Africa; he paid a big chunk of the budget of the African Union, and he welcomed Sub-Saharan Africans into his Arab country for work.

Up to one-fifth of Libya’s six million population are migrants.

They are the people who don’t historically have roots in Libya but they came as people made welcome by Gadhafi. And that welcome has turned against them.

The U.N. and human rights groups have reported summary executions and harsh detention of black Africans. The International Organization of Migration is evacuating black Africans and other migrants who want to leave. In Tripoli, the former rebel soldiers of the National Transitional Council admit they are rounding up black immigrants as a priority. Many are civilian workers who have lost or don’t have official paperwork but others are possible mercenaries.

Anyone picked up at the checkpoints littering Tripoli’s streets are first taken to a local military council, and from there to detention centers in the capital run by the Benghazi Brigade or Tripoli Brigade.

Hamed Isbaq, a member of the Benghazi Brigades in Tripoli, said: “It is possible that we pick up anywhere from 50 to 100 people daily. The people that have come in anytime in February or after and do not have legal residency, those have a special investigation.”

He admitted “dark skins” are the ones most likely to be picked up…

Human rights groups say the migrants are being harassed because of their skin color — a form of racial profiling it can get away with because of Gadhafi’s mercenaries.

Dennis Kucinich made a speech to Congress this week in which he made the following remarks:

…I op­posed the war in Libya, not only be­cause it was un­con­sti­tu­tional, but it was and is un­con­scionable for Amer­ica to pre­cip­i­tate or take sides in a civil war, spend­ing per­haps bil­lions in an on­go­ing war while we have so many press­ing needs here at home. We went in be­cause we were told a mas­sacre could occur, yet civil­ian ca­su­al­ties in Libya mounted after the U.S. and NATO at­tacked. In order to please the West, Libya co­op­er­ated with the CIA, got rid of its WMD pro­gram in 2004 and pri­va­tized its econ­omy, re­sult­ing in mas­sive un­em­ploy­ment. It was mov­ing through to re­form even as the West moved to bomb it and, in­ex­plic­a­bly, the West moved to take up the cause of el­e­ments of Al Qaeda spurring the rebels.

We learn today from CNN that the rebels and fight­ers aligned with them are loot­ing weapons ware­houses across Libya, where as many as 20,000 sur­face to air mis­siles had pre­vi­ously been kept under lock and key. West­ern of­fi­cials, per­haps the same ge­niuses who know­ingly helped Libyan rebels with ties to Al Qaeda over­throw the Libyan gov­ern­ment, are now wor­ried the sur­face to air mis­siles and other weapons will get into the wrong hands.

This law­less in­ter­ven­tion­ism spurred on by an un­ac­count­able NATO which vi­o­lates United Na­tions Se­cu­rity Coun­cil res­o­lu­tions with im­punity, this at­tempt to use force to bring oth­ers to sub­jec­tion in the name of democ­racy ac­tu­ally has be­come a de­vice for con­trol over the wealth of other na­tions and the squan­der­ing of our own wealth and the spread­ing of poverty here at home….

Leave a comment

Posted by on September 9, 2011 in Libya, MIC


Let it go.

Is anyone paying attention to what we are doing in Libya?  When this thing, this atrocity, began, it seems a few people were concerned that it was unconstitutional and illegal.  As it is.  But then something happened on the way to the forum.  The 60-day deadline for Congressional approval came and went; once the deadline was breached, everyone who thought it was unconstitutional, with the exceptions of Dennis Kucinich and a couple of “far-lefty” bloggers, simply sighed and said, ‘oh, well, guess that’s that, then – we don’t really want to get in a squabble over this, let it go.’  And go it went.
The rebels have been shown to be a group of CIA operatives and a small, motley crew loosely affiliated with al Qaeda.  Let it go.
The UN agreed that NATO could impose a no-fly zone; immediately, NATO began dropping thousands of bombs containing depleted uranium on civilian centers.  NATO bombed communication centers, hospitals, schools, gasoline storage units, food depots, medical supply houses, orphanages, and other civilian infrastructure.  Let it go.
NATO blew up the water pipeline Ghaddafi built, upon which millions of Libyans depend for their water needs and then NATO blew up the factory that made replacement pipe and fittings for the water route so that the waterway would be crippled for years.  This is an act of terrorism, by any definition.  It is a blatant violation of international law.  The water route is clearly not a military target, and puts millions of civilian Libyans at risk of death.  Let it go.
The NATO countries armed the “rebels” in violation of the arms embargo and have had “boots on the ground”, in violation of the UN agreement, since before the first bomb was dropped.  The US has had CIA operatives (disguised in Arab dress) and mercenaries in the country since the beginning and currently, the UK and Qatar openly admit to having troops fighting alongside – on the ground – the rebels. Let it go.
The NATO countries seized Libya’s national bank and helped the rebels start up their own bank almost immediately with which to do business with the West.  NATO began doing oil trade with the rebels within a month or two of the “uprising”.  Yet it strikes no-one as odd that a group of about 200 rebels was so well-prepared as to be able to conduct business while still in the beginning stages of trying to force a coup against Ghaddafi.  Let it go.
Thousands of black Africans, migrant workers in fear of the rebels, took to the seas in an effort to escape Libya and find refuge.  When they ran into trouble hundreds of miles from any shore, NATO ignored their distress calls, in violation of international maritime rescue laws, and let boatloads of them starve to death or die of thirst.  Don’t look at it.  Let it go.
Now the rebels are detaining, beating, and killing hundreds of black Africans in the new prison camps they have set up.  There are openly reported examples of mass killings of black Africans in Tripoli and other cities across Libya, yet the media is trying to blame these deaths on Ghaddafi.  Sure, sure, he did it, the despot (despite all evidence that Ghaddafi is very pro-black). Let it go.
Estimates of the dead in Libya have now reached 50,000.  Yet this was supposedly a humanitarian effort to protect civilians.  Whole towns have been obliterated.  Ignore the numbers, forget the towns existed, these are not quite the civilians we meant.  We meant someone else; the 50,000 dead mean nothing, and surely some number of them will be proved to have been military, and thus legitimate targets, right?   Let it go.
After refusing to negotiate with Ghaddafi, NATO put a bounty on his head and the rebels posted a ‘wanted, dead or alive’ message out.  This is, of course, the attempted assassination of a foreign leader and regime change of the most repellent sort, but the media crows about this illegal act as though NATO were ridding a town of it’s rabid dog problem.  Let it go.
The US and NATO learned one very valuable lesson in the sacking and destruction of Iraq: don’t let the invaded country have elections.  We come to “bring democracy”, but the subdued country may be a tad confused what with all the death, destruction, hunger and lack of infrastructure around them and who knows, may elect someone we don’t like.  So in the case of Libya, we simply announced the new government would be the rebels, the NTC (see, we gave them a name and everything, something they had somehow forgotten to do for themselves).  Here ya go, Libya, your new government-in-a-box.  What – you wanted to decide for yourselves?  Hell, these backward countries and their foreign ideas.  Look, we gave Egypt a military junta and they are ungrateful, too.  NATO helped the rebels write a new constitution for Libya already.  It’s an 18 page document that gives the oil-producing part of the country over to the governance of the UAE, with some input from the NATO countries (colonization by any other name), ends the nationalized oil profits and banking system that Libyans enjoyed under Ghaddafi, and makes the former secular government into an Islamist one.  This document calls for Sharia laws to go into effect.  We normally decry Sharia law, but in this case, we are willing to let it go.
Since we no longer fret over the appearance of such things, we are divvying up the oil fields to a select cadre of oil companies before the country even has anything like a working government in place and have allocated the funds meant to be used to end African dependence on IMF loans to the NTC.  Money earmarked by Ghaddafi for the purchase and installation of an African telecom satellite so that the continent no longer has to pay usurious leases to Europe have been seized and turned over to the rebels as well.  For the full scope of what Ghaddafi was attempting to achieve for the African nations, see this:
There is no outrage, no comment.  No questions about how legal all this is or what this implies for the people of any other country we target in the future.  We will seize, impose, enforce.  Destroy.  Don’t ask, let it go.
And now the rebels, with UK, Qatari, and American mercenary troops leading the charge, have surrounded and laid siege to several Libyan towns.  They want the towns to turn over any pro-Ghaddafi citizens or troops (one can only assume that anyone found to be pro-Ghaddafi will immediately be executed) and to surrender  – or the towns will be completely razed to the ground.  Surrender.  What the fuck does this even mean?  That the mayor step out with a white flag?  That if they but rat out their neighbors, and send them forth to be massacred, all will be forgiven?   But the rebels are shooting any men that attempt to step outside these towns, and capturing the women and children who try to leave. They have cut off water and food supplies, electricity and aid to these towns.  They have laid siege, as in the medieval use of the words: laid siege.  It is illegal.  It is illegal.  It is illegal.  It means death to all who live in these cities, and there are at least four towns currently under siege.  One way or another, the people in these towns are doomed.  Under our guidance, our leadership, done with our ever-patient tolerance for needless death.  One unasked question: since few Libyans were actually part of this CIA-fomented “rebellion”, why should they have to concede to giving up their pro-Ghaddafi neighbors?  What if an election were held and it turned out that the majority of Libyans wanted Ghaddafi to stay?  Would we kill them all?  Steven Lendman points out the international violations and ramifications of the actions of NATO in Libya and of the sieges here:

In her latest article, Diana Johnstone said “Western ‘democracy’ is in danger of being gradually reduced to a mere ideological excuse to attack, ravage and pillage other people’s countries.”…

As a result, terrorizing and destroying the Libya that was continues, focused heavily on what’s called Gaddafi loyalists’ last stronghold.

No matter the death, destruction and human misery already caused.

Or that Tripoli residents are now terrorized by a continuing bloodbath. Anyone believed to be pro-Gaddafi is under threat of death.

No matter also that Sirte, a city of 100,000, is being terror bombed relentlessly, perhaps intending to turn it to rubble…

Sirte is also surrounded. On August 30, The New York Times said rebels gave Gaddafi loyalists until Saturday to surrender “or face military action.”

On September 1, Reuters said Libya’s National Transitional Council (NTC) extended the deadline one week.

Earlier, NTC spokesman Col. Ahmed Omar Bani told a Benghazi press conference:”We have been given no indication of a peaceful surrender.” After months of conflict and unknown numbers of Sirte casualties, he shamelessly added:

“We continue to seek a peaceful solution, but on Saturday we will use different methods against these criminals.”

According to deputy TNC head Ali Tarhouni:

“Sometimes to avoid bloodshed you must shed blood, and the faster we do this the less blood we will shed.”

In other words, another possible bloodbath may ensue, besides the toll already exacted by NATO terror bombing and rebel-instigated slaughterhouse on the ground.

Since winter, they were given license to murder, terrorize, and loot with impunity. They’ve taken full advantage. Sirte is their last major plum to pluck.

A previous article warned of possible massacres, saying insurgents have the city surrounded, preparing for a final assault. Moreover, anyone attempting to leave is blocked. Women and children are forced back. Men are shot in cold blood.

Information from inside the city indicates no way to bury corpses. Earlier bombing continued around the clock. Whether or not as intensive, it’s ongoing, preparing the city for a ground attack.

It’s also being turned to rubble, massacring unknown numbers of residents, mostly civilians. It’s part of a longstanding NATO pattern, targeting noncombatants and nonmilitary related sites. Under international law, it’s a war crime.

Under the 1907 Hague Regulations, Fourth Geneva, Geneva’s Common Article III, and various other international laws, civilians are protected persons. So is civilian property. Attacking them is prohibited. War crimes are clearly defined. The principles of distinction and proportionality also apply:

— distinction between combatants and military targets v. civilians and non-military ones; attacking latter ones are war crimes except when civilians take direct part in hostilities; and

— proportionality prohibits disproportionate, indiscriminate force likely to cause damage to or loss of lives and objects.

In addition, precautions must be taken to avoid and minimize incidental loss of civilian lives, injuries to them, and damage to non-military sites. Under Fourth Geneva, they must be given “effective advance warning” and “neutralized zones” where they can be as protected as possible.

Fourth Geneva also prohibits collective punishment; the use of human shields; private property destruction; torture, cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment; denying the population adequate amounts of food and medical supplies; and assuring free passage of all “consignments” intended for civilian purposes.

Nonetheless, in all US/NATO wars, including Libya (besides earlier ones America waged), these provisions are systematically and willfully violated.

Civilians and nonmilitary related sites are considered legitimate targets, while Western powers spuriously claim every effort is made to spare them…

No matter that international law permits war only in self-defense. Moreover, only Congress can declare it, not the president overtly, covertly or any other way for any reason unless America is attacked.

In addition, the principle of non-intervention (a cornerstone of international law pertaining to national sovereignty) prohibits meddling in the internal affairs of other countries as stipulated in the UN Charter’s Article 2(7) stating:

“Nothing contained in the present charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state or shall require the Members to submit matters to settlement under the present Charter; but this principle shall not prejudice the application of enforcement measures under Chapter VII,” pertaining to threats to peace, its breaches, or acts of aggression.

Before it ends (besides what was done to Tripoli and other Libyan cities), Sirte may become another of history’s most infamous terror bombing victims.

And CNN reports the following, as though tallying scores in a football game – no commentary on legality, no hint of outrage, no suggestion that these are horrible, unacceptable measures being taken up against civilian cities, no pondering the question, “What the fuck are we doing to these people?”

Libya’s new leaders gave Gadhafi loyalists in Sirte, Bani Walid and a handful of towns until Saturday to surrender or face military force.

But there were indications that fighters were planning to enter Bani Walid, where a powerful tribe is sympathetic to Gadhafi, before the deadline.

National Transitional Council media coordinator Adel Zintani told CNN’s Kareem Khadder that fighters could enter Bani Walid by Sunday morning…

“Some tribal leaders and many of the residents have surrendered their weapons, but there are still many loyalists who are protecting Moammar Gadhafi and his sons,” Zintani said…

Anti-Gadhafi forces are positioning around the former leader’s hometown, Sirte, and Bani Walid, said Mustafa Abdul Jalil, chairman of the National Transitional Council, on Saturday.

Ali Tarhouni, interim deputy prime minister and oil minister of the NTC, said the Bani Walid was close to falling…

Tripoli has become a city of checkpoints, weapons and no real authority as the threat of Gadhafi’s loyalists lingers…

The transitional council, meanwhile, is trying to get Libya’s oil-dependent economy going again.

It expects to restart oil production at the Misla and Sarir oil fields in less than two weeks, Tarhouni said.

Ah, yes, the crux of the matter: the oil fields.  These towns, destined to be carpet-bombed into the next world…let them go.

No-one asks.  No-one pays attention.  We are all just letting it go.  We live in a world and in particular, we live in a country, run not by humans (much less statesmen), but by plague-ridden rats digging through the rubble caused by the diseases they themselves carried far and wide, searching for any scrap of value, any shiny trinket left behind, so they can claim it.

50,000 Libyans dead.  More scheduled to be slaughtered, right in front of our eyes.  Let it go.


Libya, 30 August, 2011

NATO is preparing an all-out assault on the town of Sirte, Ghaddafi’s hometown, and where he is presumably seeking shelter.  Not that Americans have noticed, but this is indeed a war, unconstitutional, unnecessary, and costly – both in terms of money and human lives.  Western media was quick to misreport Ghaddafi’s words from the start of this invented “uprising” in an effort to create the necessity for humanitarian intervention.  Ghaddafi did not say he would hunt down his citizens like dogs and kill them in their homes; he said he would hunt down the “rebels” and kill them.  He knew, and repeatedly said, that the “rebels” were linked to al Qaeda and their whole action was instigated by the CIA, statements now known to be fact.  He also knew that the reasons for the “uprising” were to privatize Libya’s oil fields, currently a nationalized project wherein all Libyans share in the profits, and to end Ghaddafi’s nationalized banking system, which he had taken to the gold standard and which he had taken pains to protect from the predation of the international banking cartels.  He further had the audacity to begin, with the other African nations, a system of central African banking intended to protect the interests of Africa; a position completely unacceptable to the US and Europe.  He is now only referred to in the western press as Ghaddafi, the “despot”, as though by such label, we can erase his later achievements: the educational system of Libya, the complete sharing of profits with the population, the water project which greened the desert, etc.

The number of Libyans killed during this war is now estimated to exceed 50,000.  This number is an estimate from the NTC (the rebels), and therefore cannot be passed off as propaganda from Ghaddafi.  That is quite remarkable, or would be, if anyone chose to remark on it.  Ghaddafi was trying to end the “rebellion” of perhaps one or two hundred CIA/al Qaeda operatives.  The NATO countries spurred the killing on and have ended up causing the obliteration of 50,000 human beings.  Currently, the “rebels”, aided by NATO, seem to have the aim of not only assassinating Ghaddafi himself (an international crime) but to massacre thousands of black African migrant workers living in Libya.  I have seen several articles in the past few days which refer to Ghaddafi in the past tense, as though he were already dead.  Such is our blithe, hard-bitten acceptance of the illegal attempt to assassinate the leader of a sovereign nation: we not only hope this attempt will be successful, we assume it will be.

Imagine a similar situation in the US.  Imagine for a moment that 200 members of the KKK descended on Washington, DC, armed by Israel’s Mossad, say, or the Chinese secret service, chanting that Obama is a socialist, demanding that they be given the reins of government and allowed to reinstate the institution of slavery.  The President replies that he will send out the National Guard to capture these insurrectionists and quell their movement.  He publicly avers that they are armed by a foreign government – which they are – and are threatening the lives of a sizable portion of the American population – which they are.  The reaction of the rest of the world, let’s imagine, is to form a coalition of armed countries and offer support to the KKK in their “uprising for freedom”.  These countries call for the removal of Obama, place a bounty on his head, and begin bombing city after city in the US, targeting specific vital infrastructure such as hospitals, television stations, water supplies, gasoline supplies, food storage facilities, and schools.  During this “kinetic humanitarian intervention”, an agreement is reached with the KKK that they are now the government of the United States and further, that Social Security would be ended and the 2.7 trillion dollars still in the fund would be given to the KKK to use as they see fit.  In the process, 50,000 Americans are killed.  Imagine that.  Just for a moment.

What we are doing in Libya is obscene.

In their breathless promotion of the “final battle” to realize the real US-NATO aim in Libya—regime-change—few in the Western media have bothered to consider the fact that the major imperialist powers are carrying out precisely the kind of act they claimed their war was designed to prevent.

Gaddafi’s troops were marching on Benghazi, the world was told, and only a “humanitarian” intervention by NATO could save the city’s innocent population. Now the “rebels” are encircling Sirte, led by British and Qatari special forces troops, intelligence operatives and mercenary military contractors, while the city’s population is being pounded by NATO bombs and cut off from food, fuel and all basic supplies

One has to go back to the crimes of the fascist powers in the 1930s and 1940s to search for parallels to such a siege: the bombing of Guernica in the Spanish Civil War, the siege of Leningrad and the Warsaw Ghetto.

NATO warplanes have over the past few days conducted scores of air strikes against Sirte, the town of Bani Walid to its west and the roads linking the two. While there have been no independent reports from Sirte, the spokesman for the Gaddafi regime, Moussa Ibrahim, reported that the continuous bomb and missile attacks have killed 1,000 people in the city and left many more wounded.

Part of this ferocious air assault is aimed at assassinating Colonel Muammar Gaddafi, who is believed by some to have taken refuge in the city or its surrounding area. Western special forces are reportedly on the ground hunting for Gaddafi, while an array of US spy planes have been deployed to pinpoint his whereabouts.

The NATO-led rebels have taken up positions on the main coastal highway both east and west of Sirte, with orders to stay in place until the NATO blitzkrieg has sufficiently annihilated the city’s defenders.

The National Transitional Council (NTC), the self-appointed body of ex-Gaddafi ministers, Western intelligence assets, Islamists and tribal functionaries that has been recognized by the major powers as the legitimate government of Libya, has announced a surrender-or-die ultimatum to the city. If a surrender is not forthcoming by Saturday, they say, the city will be subjected to military assault.

“We have been given no indication of a peaceful surrender,” an NTC military spokesman, Col. Ahmed Omar Bani, told a press conference in Benghazi. “We continue to seek a peaceful solution, but on Saturday we will use different methods against these criminals.”

“Sometimes to avoid bloodshed you must shed blood, and the faster we do this the less blood we will shed,” said Ali Tarhouni, the deputy head of the NTC…

Having supported the Western-backed dictatorships of Zine El Abidine Ben Ali in Tunisia and Hosni Mubarak in Egypt against popular revolts until the bitter end, the US and its NATO allies decided to intervene in Libya, which lies strategically between these two countries. They set about hijacking the anti-Gaddafi demonstrations that broke out last February and fomenting a civil war as a vehicle for direct NATO intervention. To this end, British and French special forces units were deployed on the ground in Libya well before any UN resolution was ever discussed.

This intervention was never about protecting the civilian population. Tellingly, a spokesman for the NTC Wednesday estimated that the total number of Libyans killed in the last six months—both civilians and combatants—has risen to over 50,000. If one were to accept as good coin the pretense that NATO waged its war for the purpose of saving human lives, it would have to be judged a colossal failure. This war has produced far more carnage than any repression that preceded it.

The goal of the NATO war is to install a puppet regime in Tripoli that will be a more pliant tool of the Western governments and energy conglomerates. Ruling circles in Washington, London, Paris and Rome are salivating over the prospect of turning the clock back 42 years to the days when the corrupt monarchy of King Idris let Standard Oil write Libya’s petroleum laws and provided military bases to both the US and Britain.

Consolidating such neocolonial aims will no doubt entail an even greater amount of bloodshed in suppressing popular opposition within Libya…

(All bolding mine.)


Leave a comment

Posted by on September 1, 2011 in Libya, MIC