lunes, 24 de octubre de 2011

La gran mentira

Una cronología explicada de los hechos previos y las circunstancias que rodean la guerra de Libia.
Ahora nos están vendiendo que "muerto el perro se acabó la rabia" y por eso sólo se habla de "el dictador libio" del "sátrapa libio" del criminal, de sus "42 años de dictadura" etc.

Esa maniobra típica de manipular a la opinión pública, y centrar todo el conflicto en una sola persona, permite moldear el pensamiento evitando que la gente libre ejerza su espíritu crítico.
Libia, con os sin Ghaddafi, seguirá luchando por una causa justa, igual que todos los pueblos oprimidos por el imperialismo galopante e implacable.

AVISO: este texto contiene imágenes violentas.

Con esas imágenes nos han vendido la gran mentira que ha supuesto este genocidio y esta violación flagrante de todo el derecho internacional y de la carta de las NNUU así como de sus cínicas resoluciones 1970 y 1973.

Hidden behind propaganda a giant crime against Libya is fact

Von Noch ein Parteibuch | 14.April 2011
What is done to Libya is a giant crime containing: waging a war of aggression to rob out a nation, a campaign of horrific murders and psychological warfare to deceive the Libyan people and the people of the world. Let’s have a closer look what did the propaganda tell the world and what really happened in Libya. Here is a timeline containing some relevant events in relation to the war against Libya, showing that the actions against Libya are based on nothing else than lies.
2002: The U.S. State Department launched the „MEPI“ program that was ostentatiously designed to support „reform efforts“ in the arab world. It supported a wide range of government opponents there for transition to freedom, democracy an human rights the way the U.S. liked to have it. It’s aim was to build up more and more US-led impact on opposition against US-sponsored regimes over the the years, so that when a country was ready, the U.S. could replace a U.S. sponsored dictatorship with a new U.S. sponsored regime. Libya was one of the programs targets.
2003: The U.S. military designated Libya along with other countries as targets for regime change by military means. In the same years the U.S. collected a coalition of the willing and launched a war of aggresion against Iraq which was based on obvious an broad propaganda lies of Iraq possesing weapons of mass destruction. Seeing the destruction and the threat against Libya, Libya abandoned all millitary programs to gain effective weapons of deterrence, paid the U.S. compensation for crimes Libya never commited, allowed western companies to exploit a part of Libya’s oil wealth and collaborated with U.S. attempts to crush islamic resistance against U.S. imperialism worldwide. These openings helped the U.S. to get foot into Libya to manifacture regime change.
2003 – : Though the US-led wars against Afghanistan and Iraq were a desaster for the U.S., the change program for the arab world was pursuid. Leaked U.S. state department records have shown, that the U.S. governmentsecretely supported government opponents in the arab world to help them change their governments with the support of the US-government. In Libya the U.S. used their limited presence to get close contacts to Libyan officials from regions dominated by tribes traditionally opposed to the government in Tripoli like justice minster Mustafa Mohammad Abduljalil, who pledged opposition to talks and preferrend action against the Libyan government.
May 2005: According to Wikipedia the Organizing Committee for the National Conference of the Libyan Opposition (NCLO) held a series of weekly meetings to discuss and develop an agenda for a conference „to put together practical approaches for following up on many efforts made by various Libyan political groups and individuals in their challenge of the Libyan dictatorship“ of Muammar al-Gaddafi. Until recently Wikipedia knew that the NCLO consists of the „Libyan Constitutional Union“, a London based revanchist organisation led by Muhammad as-Senussi, a pretender to the British sponsored Libyan monarchy, the so called „Libyan League for Human Rights“ based in Geneva, the so-called Libyan Tmazight (Berber) Congress residing in a postbox in England, and the NFSL, which is notoriously known for being sponsored by the CIA. The NCLO uses the flag of the Libyan monarchy overthrown by the Fatah revolution led by Muamar Gaddafi as the flag of their organisation as the so called „rebels“ do now.
February 15th, 2008: US Embassy in Tripoli reported to Washington, that claims by senior Libyan government officials that the islamic extremistic east of Libya is under control may be overstated. The most zealous imams tend to preach in numerous small suburban and rural mosques, which oftenly don’t physically resemble traditional mosques elsewhere in the country, reflecting in part the pseudo-secret tradition of the Sanussi lodges and are thus hard to be identified and monitored by Libyan security forces. Sermons in eastern mosques, particularly the Friday ‘khutba’, are laced with „coded phrases“ urging worshippers to support jihad in Iraq and elsewhere through direct participation or financial contributions. The language is often ambiguous enough to be plausibly denied, he said, but for devout Muslims it is clear, incendiary and unambiguously supportive of jihad. Direct and indirect references to „martyrdom operations“ were not uncommon.
August 2010: U.S.-preparations for a broad U.S.-led regime change campaign in the arab worlld were in a final stage. US-president Barack Obama issues the „Presidential Study Directive 11″, asking US government agencies to prepare for regime changes in the arab world. U.S.-Israel lobbyist David Ignatius wrote in March 2011: This document cited „evidence of growing citizen discontent with the region’s regimes“ and warned that „the region is entering a critical period of transition.“
October 20, 2010: Former Gaddafi loyalist Nouri Massoud El-Mesmari, went into exile in France and persuaded the French secret services to use his contacts to plan a regime change operation in Libya.
November 2, 2010: France and UK pledged to unify their military and started the military exercise „Southern Mistral„, a wargame, which foresaw French and British warpans bombing a southern mediterranean country in March 2011 after getting a UN security council resolution allowing the attack.
December 17, 2010: After the self-immolation of Mohamed Bouazizi on 17 December in Tunisia protests are held against poverty and the currupt government and in favour of free elections and freedom of speech. To avoid the protests look like being driven by western propaganda, the media work for the protests almost completely over US-based social network sites like Twitter and Facebook. The Tunisian goverment reacted to the protestings with meaningless TV speeches and violence of the security forces to crush all protests. In the forefront for the media work for the Tunisian uprising were social media activists financed and trained by organisations of the US establishment like Freedom House and American Islamic Congress. Scott Carpenter, GW Bush’s point man of his MEPI regime change program,publicly confirmed that the U.S. had done a lot of stuff to prepare the uprising in Tunisia and that did it very quietly, almost covert.
January 2011: Con­tain­ers full of weapons, ammu­ni­tion and explo­sives and around 1000 Thuraya mobile phones were smuggled into Libya through the port of Misrata and distributed with the help of Al-Naseem icecream Factory owned by Raiedha fam­ily clan.
January 13, 2011: Rachid Ammar, Chief of Staff of the Tunisian military with good contacts to the U.S. millitary, declared that he sided with the uprising. As his troops proved to be loyal to the chief of stuff in this situation and the military had more men and fire power than the police and the Tunisian presidents security forces, with the defection of Rachid Ammar the US led regime change operation in Tunisia successfully ousted long term Tunisian president Ben Ali a day later. After Ben Ali was ousted the western media machine was put into full swing to instigate uprisings leading to regime change in other MEPI target countries as well.
January 25, 2011: Western mass media and the media network Al Jazeera based in the US client dictatorship Qatar successfully promoted a call for mass protests in Egypt against police violents and government corruption starting on January 25, 2011. The following day the Egypt Muslim Brotherhood kicked in and called it’s members and friends to support the uprising against the regime of Hosni Mubarak. Egypt security forces reacted with brutal violence against protesters, killing hundreds of them, and deliberate false flag violence of security forces in plain clothes against the population to justify the violence to crush the protests. Media work for the uprising was led by Al Jazeera. Western government officials up to US president Barack Obama openly and publicly supported the uprising, making no secret that they demanded president Hosni Mubarak to step down. While branches of the military like the Air Force were loyal to president Husni Mubarak military forces loyal to General Sami Hafez Enan, Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces, who was the week before the Egyptian uprising started in the U.S. for talks with senior officials, prevented the Egypt uprising to be crushed by security forces in it’s central meeting place, the Tahrir Square in Cairo. To prevent a war between different branches of the military, the Egyptian military council staged a coup on February 11, 2011, oustind president Hosni Mubarak and empowering itself.
February 15, 2011: Two days ahead of an announced uprising on Facebook, violent protests in Benghazi were seen in front of the state secuity building in support of the recently arrested lawyer Fethi Tarbel, who represents victims of the 1996 Abu Salim prison uprising mass killings case. The protests were dispersed by security forces without any loss of life, but leaving some 38 people injured. According to France 24 quoting Benghazi-based, privately-owned Quryna newspaper, which itself quoted Abdelkrim Gubaili, described director of a local hospital, most of the injured were security officials. France 24 cited in it’s also unnamed „witnesses“, of whom France 24 said, their reports are „hard to confirm“, who alleged, that „security officials were driving their cars into the crowd at high speeds.“ France 24 also embedded than a Youtube video of what it said: „Unconfirmed YouTube footage from Tuesday morning shows protesters gathering outside a Benghazi police station when panic sweeps the crowd and gunshots are heard.“ Though the video was unconfirmed, a gun shot sound track can be easily added to a video, and the allegation of security forces shooting into the crowd contradicted all infomation from named sources, the link to this video wasspread widely over social media, often called proof that „Gaddafis security forces“ fired into the crowd. Interestingly, this video allegedely proof for „Gaddafis crimes“ at the beginning of the uprising in Libya, was in the meantime – as Youtube informs – „removed by the user“. This video fake was one of the means to incite people to violence in Libya for the planned uprising.
February 17, 2011: Planned start day for the Libyan uprising. As the anonymous Facebook-page calling for a day of rage , ie violent protests, used the flag of the monarchy as it’s symbol it made it clear from tee beginning, that not bringing Libya to „prosperity“, as it claimed, but a counter revolution violently overthrowing the Libyan government was the goal. The NCLO takes credit for organizing the uprising. Qatari Al Jazeera, Saudi Al Arabia and western media stations reported on this Facebook page, thus informed many million people of the planned uprising. In various cities of Libya, some hundred to several thousand people have shown up for protests against the government. Others have shown up in government organzied ralleys showing support for the Libyan government. Fake news spread via Al Jazeera by anonymous callers on alleged government attrocities against anti government protesters heated up the mood of crowds as did the fake video of government forces firing into crowds from February 15th.
One of the most powerful false allegations against the government was the murderous rumour spread by Al Jazeera, Al Arabia, Press TV and most western mass media that the government used „African merceneries“ to crush the uprising. When human rights watch later send Peter Bouckaert to speak with black people arested by „rebels“ as mercenaries and investigate the claim, he found no evidence for the „rebels“ allegation, that the government used merceneries at all. Instead he found out, that all 156 captured black people captured by „rebels“ and presented to him as black mercenaries, were in fact regular Libyan soldiers coming from the south of Libya, were most people are black.
Especially in the cities of the jihadist hotbed in the northeast of Libya, Benghazi, Ajdabiya, Al Beida, Derna and Tobruk, – justifying it’s actions with the false black mercenary allegation – lynch mobs were hunting black people, arresting, mistreating and killing blck people in the most ugly ways with knives. As many people in wealthy Libya have mobile phones with cameras the crowds videotaped such crimes an uploaded videos to social media sites as signs of victory.
Here are some videos showing some of the murderous crimes and attrocities against black people committed by western and arabic backed islamist „rebels“ under the cheering of enraged islamic crowds in these days in the northeast of Libya.
Here is one uploaded February, 19th:
Here is one video posted on February, 23rd, showing „rebels“ who captured a black man in a workers dress:
Here is one more video showing what kind of racist crimes against black people the so called eastern Libyan „rebels for freedom an democrcy“ have committed – and it shows the cheering crowd as well.
Here is one more video showing a murderous crime of the racist lynch mob, which western and arab propaganda dubs „peaceful protesters“:
There are many more such videos of such horrific deliberate crimes of the „rebels“ – often racist murders commited against helpless black people which were already handcuffed. Every and each government has not only the right, but also the duty to stop such murderous lynch mobs – and the government should exercise the amount of force that is necessary to stop such lynch mobs.
Now let’s have a look what is allegdely crimes of Gaddafi against his own people. Here is a typical video taping of these alleged crimes:
We hear hat is alleged to be gutshots on young people protesting in the streets. Nobody knows if the gunshot soundtrack of the video is real or if it is fake. We see that the camera man is making hectic moves with his camera. It may be deliberately done to give the video more action. We see no one hurt. See the videos of mobs lynching black people above. Even if the shots are real they might be just warning shots. Knowing what horrific crimes lynch mobs of young people just committed publicly in the streets, firing warning shots could hardly be labeled as a disproportionate response to disperse a crowd of a racist lynch mob.
Now, let’s have a look of what is alleged to be proof a horrific crime of the government forces loyal to Muamar Gaddafi. See here two screenshots of a video, 1:06 min long, showing alleged crimes of Gaddafi loyalists.
Sekunde 15 von 1:06 min langem Video
Screenshot: Second 15 of a 1:06 min long Video
Look at this screenshot well and remember. See that between the three killed men in uniforms there is an empty place in the middle, bloody were a head may have been laying.
Sekunde 39 von 1:06 min langem Video
Screenshot: Second 39 of 1:06 min long Video
Look at this screenshot well, and remember, too. Ask yourself: what kind of weapon has been used to cause that kind of injury?
The video, posted on many video channels and titled for example „GRAPHIC Lybian Soldiers Executed – By Gaddafi’s Mercenaries – Libya – Smuggled Video“, was uploaded to Youtube on 23rd of February. The description of the video reads – at the Youtube channel SurvivalWithBushcraf:
Soldiers tied up and executed by Gaddafi mercenaries for refusing to kill protesters! Reuploaded from … WARNING Extremely graphic video smuggled to an Al Jazeera reporter across the border in Libya. This is evidence of crimes against humanity which the world should know about especially the West. The information given is that these are soldiers who refused to kill their own people so they were tied up and executed.
The video shows about 18 government soldiers and security forces, most of them with their hands handcuffed on the back brutally and bloodily slaughtered. The deads are shown close up and other people as the slaughtered are just seen in the last seconds. Comments below the video read like „Gaddafi is a devil they should burn him alive.“ Nobody questioned who were the devils who commited this crime. It was „Gaddafi mercenaries“ slaughtering security forces because they didn’t want to kill such peaceful freedom and democracy demonstrators as the participants of the islamic lynch mobs seen above. How did the world know? Because hundreds of anonymous social media sites like Libyafeb17.com told it this way. Please note, that Libyafeb17.com has removed the video embedding and that someone who said he is admin of Youtube channel WadiTR, created February 18, 2011, has given a comment, declaring that he is the „admin of the YouTube Page that posted this Video“. So the world was set up to believe, that Libya is the only dictatorship in the world, were the brutality of the dictatorship is not proven by massacred peaceful protesters, but proven by a video showing masscred government forces. Of course, that’s bullshit.
It can be proven. Other videos of this horrific crime scene do exist, too. See here a video, probably taped by a different person, which is 55 seconds long. Watch it well.
The video shows allegedly „rebels“, who found the soldiers, which were slaughtered by Gaddafis mercenaries because they refused to kill their fellow Libyan people. Have you noticed something? Here is a screenshot of second 10.
Sekunde 10 von 0:55 min langem Video
Screenshot: Second 10 of 0:55 min long Video
This white skinned guy is badly injured, but he moves his hand, so he is still alive. The guy is lying exactly at the place were in the 1:06 min long video is an empty space. Look at the screenshot. The guy still living is videotaped in close-up, but neither the camera man nor anybody else of these sympathic human rights and democracy rebels seems to help him. Didn’t they notice, that he he still alive?
More videos of this horrific crime scene do exist. See here a video, probably taped by a different person, which is 1:25 min long. Watch it well, too.
Have you seen? Look the screenshot of 1:18 min.
Minute 1:18 von 1:25 min langem Video
Screenshot: Minute 1:18 of 1:25 min long Video
Someone who – like all of the people present at the crime scene in this video as in the last video, you can hear men and at least one woman speaking with each other in the background – doesn’t want to come into the picture, gives the guy, who is still living, a bit water. Just the rest still in the bottle. But nothing more. Nobody cares trying to stop him bleeding. Nobody cares for him, fo example speaking with him to keep him awake until – maybe – an ambulance comes. Have you ever seen an accident on the street where people were injured? What kind of people would behave this way? It’s easy to say: murders behave in such a way. What we have seen here in these videos are the murders taping the fresh crimescene of their own crime to publish the video and blame this horrific crime on Gaddafi.
The guy who is still living is the same guy, who was lying at a different place and whose head was completely smashed in the 1:06 min long video. See the screenshot and compare. That means that the head of this guy was smashed after the „rebels“ taped the crimescene when he was still living. „Rebels“ smashed his head after the 0:55 min and the 1:25 min long videos were taped. You still don’t believe what you see?
So see this video, it shows some of the victims still alive – together with some of the people who overwhelmed them. The video was made in the night – as the victims didn’t redress in the meantime, probably shortly before their were killed. Watch closely:
Do you remember this guy? His pullover is very specific.
Minute 3:47 von 4:46 min langem Video
Now have a look of a weapon used by the people, who took the soldiers hostage before they were killed.
Minute 4:32 von 11:51 min langem Video
Screenshot: Minute 4:32 of 11:51 min long Video
The big black guy, who is among those later slaughered, is threatened with kind of a wooden club, an iron rod or a sword. Hard to say from the video what it is exactly, but such a weapon could probably cause such injuries as we have seen in the massacre of the captured soldiers.
Now look at those who took the soldiers hostage before they were slaughtered.
Minute 5:02 von 11:51 min langem Video
Screenshot: Minute 5:02 of 11:51 min long Video
The soldier in the front is one of those who is saughtered later. He is upset, and someone – probably a woman – is laying a hand on his shoulder to calm him down. In the background at the left the guy with the black woolen hat is clearly one of the captors.
Minute 5:04 von 11:51 min langem Video
Screenshot: Minute 5:04 of 11:51 min long Video
The guy with the white jacket is one of the captors. The person with the camera is clearly trying to avoid to tape him on video, but at one time he slipped into the picture. If you watch the video closely at these seconds where he appears, you can see, that he has got a long gun in his right hand. In the background we can see the window. It’s night and some people are in front of the window watching the crime scene.
Minute 5:28 von 11:51 min langem Video
Screenshot: Minute 5:28 of 11:51 min long Video
A very young man is shown who covers his face partly with a scarf so he will be a bit harder to recognize if the police will looking for him for taking soldiers hostage, who are killed later in a barbaric manner. He is one of the captors.
Minute 5:35 von 11:51 min langem Video
Screenshot: Minute 5:35 of 11:51 min long Video
This person remains a mystery so far. It’s just an arm. It’s probably the person who videotapes the hostage taking. As this screenshot was taken, a female hstage taker argues heavily with the big black guy, who is later among the dead. So, the person who took the video is most probably a woman. But she is never to be seen in the picture because it is her, who tapes the video.
That hostage taker people are clearly not Gaddafi special troops. These are rebels, taping thir own hostage taking crime. An later they tape the crimescene of the massacre, which they committed themselves. They published the videos of their own crimes and labeled them „Crimes of Gaddafi“.
This is interesting enough. What is even more interesting is that this pattern is to be seen in different places in Libya. Rebels murder people, soldiers and Gaddafi supporters, tape their crime, publish it on social media sites and label it „Crimes of Gaddafi“. Check your favorite search engine t find more such alleged Gaddafi crimes which are in fact rebel crimes. Think yourself: if it’s true somebody has organzied this uprising in this way, which is clearly a murderous and brutal campaign of the most racist and disgusting people around there.
Claims of international human rights organisations about the number of victims of the first days of the uprising in Libya differed grossly, from a view hundred to many thousands. None of the human rights organization made it transparent how they calculated number of victims. As Wikipedia notes, on February 24, the IFHR said that 130 soldiers had been executed in Benghazi and al-Baida, after they mutinied and sided with the protesters. After seeing the video proof above that „rebels“ murdered government soldiers and tried to blame their own crime on Gaddafi loyalists, one may have a guess, what the reality behind this statement his.
It was not completely unknown to the western media what really happened in Libya. If you read western papers carefully, it was possible to find sparks of truth between whole lot’s of unsubstantiated propaganda against the Libyan government. Just read these lines taken published in the Telegraph at February 23rd, 2011:
Ahmed Ahmed Ibrahim showed video footage he had captured on his mobile telephone of an African mercenary hanging from a meat-hook in an Al Bayda doorway. … Masquerarding as pro-Gaddafi partisans, they duped the mercenaries, who were described as French-speaking Africans, captured them and then dragged them into the streets of Al Bayda, Libya’s third largest city. Mr Ibrahim, who works in a cafe, said he believes most were executed although he only witnessed two slain foreigners.
By 26th of February a god deal of what happened in eastern Libya coud even be read in the Wikipedia article „Battle of Benghazi“:
During the 18th and 19th, there were major retaliatory attacks by the opposition forces against the mercenaries. 50 African mercenaries were executed by the protesters in al-Baida when they burned down the police station in which they locked them up. Additionaly, another 15 captured mercenaries were lynched in al-Baida, Benghazi and Derna. The bodies of some of them were put on display and caught on video.
Following the seconds attack on a funeral, opposition forces commandeered bulldozers and tried to breach the walls, often succumbing under heavy fire. As fighting continued, a mob attacked a local army base on the outskirts of Benghazi and forced the soldiers to give up their weapons, including three small tanks. Opposition members than rammed those tanks into the Katiba’s walls. Days later, the burned hulks of the armored vehicles could still be seen, stuck halfway into the breaches they made.
The fighting stopped in the morning of the 20th. Another 30 people were killed during the previous 24 hours of fighting. For a third time, a funeral procession was passing the compound. However, under the cover of the funeral, a suicide car-bomber attacked the compound’s gates blowing them up. Opposition fighters again attacked the base, this time reinforced with fighters from al-Baida and Derna. During this final attack by the opposition 42 people died. In the afternoon the Interior Minister Abdel-Fattah Younis showed up with a special forces squad called the „Thunderbolt“. His orders were to reliev the besieged barracks. However, Younis defected to the opposition and granted safe passage to Gaddafi’s loyalists out of the compound and out of the city.
On the forefront of propaganda lies against the Libyan government was the TV channel Al Jazeera based in the gulf dictatorship Qatar. In it’s propaganda efforts it closely collaborated with defectors from the Libyan government. Here is a piece from Al Jazeeras live blog on Libya of February 22, 2011:
11:26 am Ali al-Essawi, the resigned Libyan ambassador to India, has told Al Jazeera’s Prerna Suri that he is afraid to return to his country. He has confirmed the use of fighter aircraft on civilian protesters and said foreign mercenaries from what appear to be African countries are „massacring“ his people.
11:37 am Many eyewitness in Tripoli have reported extreme violence in the past 48 hours: Fighter jets bombarding and heavily armed mercenaries using high-caliber, perhaps even anti-aircraft guns on protesters. So far, though, almost no images or videos have emerged of the attacks. LibyaFeb17.com just posted what they say are a few pictures of Tripoli on Monday. Here’s one of a burned-out „Public Hall“
So, as we already explained above from human rights watch, the allegation of mercenaries in the service of the Llibyan government is completely false and was an ugly one for many black people in Libya as crowds went through the streets to hunt black people as „mercenaries“ lynching them sometimes on the spot. Both, Al Jazeera and Ali al-Essawi, the resigned Libyan ambassador to India, are guilty of spreading this murderous lie. But in this short piece of Al Jazeera propaganda there are more bold lies: the alleged use of fighter aircraft on civilian protesters. There was no proof at all for this allegation, it was just claimed by defectors and anonymous telephone callers, which Al Jazeera and BBC call „witnesses“. As the Russian military revealed on March 1st, the ymonitored the airspace over Libya closely via satellites, and they found out that such airstrikes did not happen. Interestingly, one can be sure, that NATO states also monitored the Libyan airspace closely, and they just were mute. They didn’t give any evidence for the claim, and they did neither say that it was a wrong claim made. The allegation, that the Libyan government used „high-caliber, perhaps even anti-aircraft guns on protesters“, is also totally unsubstantiated.
Undisputed fact is that the murderous „rebels“ in eastern Libya managed to get in control of large arms depots of the Libyan military and the border with Egypt, so that they could get all kinds of support via Egypt. Many „protestors“ were seen with heavy weapons after the uprising succeeded to get control over the eastern part of Libya.
So, what was the reaction of the Libyan government to this uprising? Saif Al-Islam Gaddafi, the son of revolution leader Muamar Gaddafi, went on TV, speaking freely without script, vowed for a peaceful solution of the conflict, offered to negotiate about all political and social demands, but vowed, for the case, that the armed rebels in control of eastern Libya were trying to wage war against the Libyan government in the rest of the country an to conquer towns other than the eastern towns under their control, a fight against the rebels up to the last bullet. The rebels declined any talks with the government as long as Muamar Gaddafi didn’t step down from his position as the leader of the Fatah revolution. The rebels vowed to take up their arms they plundered from military depots and wage war against the Libyan government which has their stronghold west of the rebels.
February 21st, 2011: Israeli president Shimon Peres happily announces that there will be a Libya without Gaddafi and calls it „irony of history“ that Libya leader recently expressed desire for a „Middle East without Israel.“
February 22nd, 2011: British foreign secretary William Hague announces, that Britain is to launch an air and sea bid to help evacuate its nationals from Libya. In the following ten days military ships and military aircraft from various NATO member states like UK, Italy and Germany violate the souverenity of Libyan territory, ostentatively to evacuate western citizens.
February 25th, 2011: 41 influental U.S. rightwingers, neocons and zionists, many of them where at the forefront of leading the U.S. to war against Iraq on the behalf of Israel in 2003, demand from Barack Obama to take take quick and decisive action against Muamar Gaddafi.
February 26th, 2011: The „international community“ reacts to the violent and now armed insurgency of the murderous mob of racists in Libya. Defected Libyan ambassadors the UN drafted a security council resolution 1970 with sanctions and financial frozes against Libya and additionally an order for criminal prosecution of Libyan government officials and Muamar Gaddafi and his family. Effectively this resolution was designed to cut of the Libyan government from money, to make it impossible for Libya to defend itself against warmongering countries by divesting from their markets and to lead the Libyan insurgency to victory. The resolution has olso forbidden to prevent any kind of arms and military assistance to Libya. This applied to both sides, the government and the anti government forces, but as anti government forces were confident that they would win their civil war against the Libyan government without any foreign interference, it seemed to them to be no problem for the forces of insurgency. As it were defected, but still not replaced, Libyan officials who demanded the adoption of the resolution and the punishment of Libya, on February 26th, the resolution was adopted with 15 to 0 votes. Wikipedia notes as background of this resolution:
During the 2011 uprising, Gaddafi’s loyalist forces carried out aerial bombings in Tripoli over civilian protesters, which drew widespread condemnation.
As we have already explained „aerial bombings in Tripoli over civilian protesters“ is just a flat propaganda lie, but as the Libyan UN diplomats had defected, Libya had no way to defend itself against the lies which the resolution is based upon. So, in effect, instead of condemning the shockingly racist and brutal killings of the so called rebels, the Libyan government was declared pariah and robbed of it resources, just because it tried to stop murderous mobs killing innocent people. Before the resolution, there were no UN fact finding efforts what happened in libya. Libya demanded a fact finding mission from Tripolis, but Western world powers denied this Libyan demand.
US president Barack Obama demands, that Muamar Gaddafi immediately has to flee his homeland Libya, said: „Gaddafi must leave Libya now“, as if the U.S. had any legitimacy to demand from the Libyan government handing over Libya to a bunch of murderous racists sponsored by the CIA. With that statement he made it clear to the public, that the U.S. goal for Libya is „regime change“.
February 27th, 2011: Muamar Gaddafi gave an interview to Serbian television station RTV Pink, calling the UN Security Council resolution „invalid in accordance with the United Nations Charter“ and that the resolution was based on the news reports rather than on actual state in Libya. He vowed to stay in Libya and said „foreigners and Al-Qaeda“ were responsible for the unrest.
February 28th, 2011: US foreign secretary Hillary Clinton declared that the U.S. was reaching out to the bunch of racist murderers in control of eastern Libya and was prepared to offer „any kind of assistance.“ The US Navy began openly to position several war ships near the coast of Libya. UK Prime Minister David Cameron proposed the idea of a „no-fly zone“, using as reason lies that the Libyan government needs to be stopped from airlifting mercenaries and using his military aeroplanes and armoured helicopters against civilians – but offered no proof that Libya ever did that.
While demanding on CNN that the U.S. should enforce a no fly zone and bomb government forces, Ali Aujali, Libyan ambassador to the U.S. until he defected on February 22nd, 2011, implicitely acknowledged that the U.S. and western powers encouraged the uprising in Libya: „They are — they are raising and encouraging people to raise against the dictatorship. And when the people raise, then they just look from distance and watching them. Then they put us in the middle of the fire, and then OK, we have to discuss with our allies. We have to go through the United Nations. This is not the case. Then please, if you can’t support us, don’t encourage us to raise against the dictatorship.“
March 1st, 2011: Venezuelan president offers to help finding a mediated peaceful solution between the Libyan government and the „opposition“ forces holding territory in estern Libya and some streets in western Libyan cities. Muamar Gaddafi agreed to a negotiated peaceful solution of conflict between government and opposition.
In a joint operation of psychological warfare against Muamar Gaddafi with the CIA, the Qatari media station Al Jazeera and the Israeli paper Yediot Aharonot planted the fake story, that the Libyan government ordered 50.000 „African mercenaries“ from Israel, with the intent to instigate anger among Libyan muslims against Muamar Gaddafi and notwithstanding the collateral damage of even more lynched black peope in Libya by islamist mobs.
In a US DoD news briefing US defense secretary Robert Gates said when questioned if he has any evidence or independent confirmation, and if so, to what extent, that the Libyan government actually has fired on his own people from the air, that he has seen the press reports, but he has no confirmation of that and Admiral Michael Mullen added that the US DoD has seen no confirmation for this allegation whatsoever.
March 2nd, 2011: US defense secretary Robert Gates gave himself unenthusiastic on a „no fly zone“ over Libya and told the US congress: „Let’s just call a spade a spade. A no-fly zone begins with an attack on Libya to destroy the air defenses.“
March 3rd, 2011: The United States, France and Libyan opposition figuresdismiss the Venezuelan proposal to mediate crisis and flatly reject any talks not leading to immediate „regime change“.
When Libyan security forces catched a military helicopter of NATO member state Netherlands which was sent secretly and in violation of Libyan souvereignity to Sirt – allegedly to evacuate two EU citizens, though there was no upising and no danger for foreign citizens in Sirt – it was discovered, that the Dutch military evacuation chopper was not unarmed, but had in fact a lot of weapons on board.
So it was not only a violation of Libyan souvereignity, but also a clear violation of UNSC resolution 1970, which is forbidding to bring arms to Libya. It was never cleared why the Dutch military chopper took so many weapons with it, and the capture of the chopper hinted to the possibility that NATO was covertly arming insurgents in Libya under the cover of evacuation missions. Though there was a Live Stream of the imam enraging the masses, there is no video of that hate mongering prayer available. Just a short Iranian Press TV report is there showing the imam preaching martyrdom. It shows also how Press TV spread the above decomposed lie of Libyan government forces being killed by government forces for not killing their own fellow countrymen.
March 4th, 2011: At Friday prayers in Benghazi clerics incited the masses of islamic believers to conquer western Libya in a „total war of islamic liberation“.
Masses of armed believers stormed west, conquered the oil raffinery of Ras Lanuf. After conquering the oil towns of Brega and Ras Lanuf, the bunch of racists bunch of so called „rebels“ harrassed workers, especially black ones. As the armed crowds arrived to Breage and Ras Lanuf Libyan government troops retreated, so that they did not need to fire into the armed crowds and there was no bloody combat while the fighters had many young combat tourists between them.
A British SAS/MI6 special forces team was captured by rebels in eastern Libya. The British commando team was secretely flown in the night by helicopter into remote sparsely populated lands dozens of kilometres away from Benghazi. The British commando team was armed with guns and had explosives as well as false passworts from various nations with them. After British defense secretary Liam Fox pubicly confirmed, that the captured commando team was indeed British, and stated they were just junior diplomats „looking for a hotel“ to find for a senior diplomat yet to follow, the commando team was released on March 7th and taken out of Libya on a British war supply ship, that had docked in Benghazi without the permission of the Libyan government. As they left Libya, they reportly gave their weapons, satellite communication and computer equipment along with secret codes to access worldwide British military networks to insurgents. The British forces were operating in Libya in clear violation of the military embargo of UNSC resolution 1970. Later it was reported, that „scores“ of British commando teams were already secretly operating in Libya to mark Libya sites to be bombed by forces of NATO states later.
Israel firster Bernard-Henri Lévy held a private meeting with former Libyan justice secretary turned rebel leader Moustapha Abdeljalil in Benghazi and pledged to support him bringing down Israel’s long time thorn in the eye Muamar Gaddafi. On the very same evening he phoned his friend, the zionistFrench president with close CIA relations, Nicolas Sarkozy, and got his agreement to receive the NTC leaders.
March 6th, 2011: The armed islamic racists dubbing themselves „revolutionaries“ moved from Ras Lanuf further to conquer western Libya. When they came of few dozen kilometers to the west, residents of the hamlet of Ben Jawad opened fire on the „rebels“ and with the help of the Libyan army they pushed them back to the oil town of Ras Lanuf. One of the islamist bunches of self dubbed freedom fighters complained to the media that the residents of Ben Jawad were guilty of treachery. CNN reporter Ben Wedemann said he left Ras Lanuf, last not least because many of the so-called „rebels“ had smoken hashish and there were „stoned adolescents armed to the teeth stumbling around the halls at night“.
In the following days, government forces regained control of the oil installations in Ras Lanuf and Brega, mainly by the method of spooking the „rebels“ with bombs and grenades thrown in the desert next to the rebel crowd. As „rebels“ were spooked into full retreat back to Benghazi and were endangered of being brought to justice for their slaughtering soldiers and black people US president Barack Obama reportedly authorized „covert operations by the CIA“ to support the rebels.
March 7th, 2011: French state news agency AFP reports, that Britain and France could put a resolution to the UN Security Council this week demanding a no-fly zone over Libya.
March 8th, 2011: The totalitarian monarchies of the Gulf Cooperation Councilback the plan of a no fly zone against their long time foe Muamar Gaddafi, who dared to publicly mock them as dictatorships in the years before.
March 9th, 2011: „Rebel spokesman“ Mustafa Gheriani says, despite the UN arms embargo he doesn’t see getting arms as an issue, because „Qatar and many other countries have offered to help“
March 10th, 2011: US Director of National Intelligence James Clapper contradicted the western and arab media hype of winning „rebels“ and told the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee, that the Libyan government would likely defeat the insurgents.
The Obama administration declared, that any potential military action against Libya „would need to respond to a demonstrable need“, „have a sound legal basis“ and „active regional participation“ from the Arab League and African nations. “Not just rhetorical support but actual participation, which we think is absolutely critical for a variety of reasons,” Obamas National Security Advisor Tom Donilon told reporters.
The Peace and Security Council of the African Union met in Addis Abeba and released a declaration on the situation in Libya for the United Nations Security Council and other concerned AU partners, where it reaffirmed „its rejection of any foreign military intervention, whatever its form.“
After Nicolas Sarkozy met with rebel leaders in Paris on recommendation of Israel firster Bernard-Henri Lévy, he promised airstrikes against Libyan military airports and France declared, that it recognized the rebels self-appointed National Transitional Council as legitimate government of Libya and planned to exchange ambassadors with this body, creating a possible pretext for a unilateral French war of aggression against Libya in hep of the „rebel government“ similar to what the US intended to do with the Bay of Pigs Invasion in Cuba 1961.
March 11th, 2011: Seeking again a peaceful solution to conflict the Libyan government offered an amnesty to all insurgents who lay down their weapons. US president Barack Obama states, that the US is „slowly tightening the noose on Gadhafi“, using a wording, that reminds more of cowboys hanging an adversary than words of a head of a states.
March 12th, 2011: The Arab League met to decide on it’s support of a „no fly zone“ over Libya. Libya was excluded from the meeting. From 22 member states of the Arab League, 11 participated in the meeting. The decision takenby this Arab League meeting was, that the Arab League supported a UN security council call for a no fly zone over Libya, but rejected any military intervention in Libya. Asked how it would be possible to avoid „military action“ while imposing a no-fly zone, Amr Moussa, the Arab League secretary-general, replied by saying that it could be implemented through jamming Libyan military signals, and Youssef Bin Alawi Abdullah, the Omani foreign minister, added that if foreign military intervention is to take place at any point then it will be discussed further by the Arab League and a reaction should be expected. Since Syria and Algeria were strictly against any military intervention in Libya and decisions in the Arab League are taken only by unique votes, the Arab League never took any decision to allow any foreign military attack against Libya.
Western governments and media hailed the support of the Arab League for a no fly zone over Libya and deliberately kept quiet about the fact, that the Arab League’s decision also excluded any military intervention in Libya.
March 14th, 2011: CIA commander Khalifa Haftar came from Virginia in the USA to eastern Libya to command the bunch of hash smoking islamic racists who dub themselves „rebels“.
March 15th, 2011: As the armed hash smoking crowds ran away, Libyan government forces had little problems to regain control of the desert oil installations in Ras Lanuf and Brega. By March, 15th, Libyan government forces were heading to the strategic town of Ajdabiya, from which quick roads lead to Benghazi in the north and Tobruk in the east. A quick end of the armed insurrection was in sight.
The same influental U.S. zionists club of warmongers, who already wrote a letter to urge Obama to take action against Muamar Gaddafi on February 25,now urge Barack Obama to take more action against Libya, given the situation, it’s clear that they demand war against Libya.
March 17th, 2011: Though rebels used heavy weapons like tanks, artillery and a helicopter Libyan government forces quickly regained control over the town of Ajdabiya in eastern Libya, because their was just a small group of armed people fighting against the government, but their was no popular resistance against the governemnt forces.. The Libyan government said, it could reach Benghazi within one day, restore order there and will then go mercilessly from house to house and from door to bring those racists to justice, who slaughtered innocent people. The stooges of the CIA and MI6 went on the run and the murderous „rebel“ regime of Benghazi was in the verge of collapse. End of death and descrution was close and the truth about to come to light.
But France, Britain and U.S. didn’t want to let Libya go without getting in control of the Libyan oil. The UN security council voted ith ten votes in favour and five abstentions for UN security council resolution 1973, which was sponsored by Lebanon, France, Britain und the USA. This resolution authorized any member state of the UN to „take all necessary measures to protect civilians under threat of attack in the country, including Benghazi, while excluding a foreign occupation force of any form on any part of Libyan territory“ and a „no fly zone“. This resolution meant in effect, that each country in the world was allowed to attack Libya militarily whoever it liked as long as it informed the UN secretary general after the attack and declared, that the attack had the intention to rotect civilians. The resolution stated that „widespread and systematic attacks currently taking place in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya against the civilian population may amount to crimes against humanity“ and „gross and systematic violation of human rights, including arbitrary detentions, enforced disappearances, torture and summary executions“.
Though the resolution 1973 was the equivalent of a declaration of war of the UN against Libya there was offered no proof for the judgements of the Security Council members at all. The Indian ambassador to the UN, Manjeev Singh Puri, „explaining his abstention, expressed great concern over the welfare of the population of Libya and supported the appointment of the Secretary-General’s Envoy“, and declared: „The report of that Envoy and that of others had not yet been received. As a consequence, today’s resolution was based on very little clear information, including a lack of certainty regarding who was going to enforce the measures. There must be certainty that negative outcomes were not likely before such wide-ranging measures were adopted.“ A few days later, Russian prime minister Vladimir Putin said in a remark giving his private opinion although as prime minister foreign policy is not his job any more, slammed the UN resolution on Libya as „medieval call to crusade“ and called it „defective and flawed“.
Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton later justified the UNSC resolutions and the US-led war of aggresion against Libya with the long-debunked bold lies like the ones that the Libyan government used jet fighters to bomb the civilian population:
March 18th, 2011: According to a report in the Wall Street Journal Egypt’s military is supplying arms to Libyan rebels with the US government’s full knowledge. Though there exists a UNSC weapons embargo on all Libya rebels have lot’s of western weapons, ammunition and other military equipment, which the Libyan government never had. See a video from 5th April analyzing the weaponry and military advisers of the rebels as they can be seen in press fotos:
The warmongers from the US, France and Britain detected, that they have except some lip service very few no regional support for their war against Libya, except from NATO member states and the far aay arab gulf dictatorship Qatar. All neighbor states of Libya declared that they won’t take part in the war against Libya.
March 19th, 2011: French fighter planes attack Libyan government soldiers, supporters and vehicles between Ajdabiya and Benghazi, commiting a massacre killing dozens of innocent people. France justified the war action against Libyan government supporters with the lie, that the government supporters wanted to commit a massacre in Benghazi. The US launchesmore than 100 heavy Tomahawk cruise missiles against various towns in Libya, killing many people they were claiming to protect, destroying Libyan military intsallations and especially „communication hubs“, appearantly to make the Libyan government and state TV silent so that there own lies could not be exposed, and killing scores of people. Britains attacked Libya with two Tomahawks, so that Obama could say, his war against Libya as an international effort.
March 20th, 2011 and following days: In the name of UNSC 1973 sanctioned „protecting civilians“ the US and other NATO countries continued heavy bombing of all government controlled Libya from jet fighters, dropping many heavy depleted uranium bombs poisoning large areas of Libya and human genes of large parts the Libyan population for generations. Though Barack Obama claimed before the attack, that active regional participation was neccessary to wage war against Libya, he could not find a single non NATO member country which was willing to participate in this crime. Even the US sponsored dictatorships on the Arabian peninsula, whose leaders hate Gaddafi for mocking them, feared bad repercussions among their populations and hesitated.
March 26th, 2011: Under the pretext of „protecting civilians“ NATO air planesheyvily bombed dozens of Libyan government supporters in and near the city of Ajdabiya, so that the way free for their lackeys on the ground to conquer the city of Ajdabiya and slaughter black people there. „Rebel“ loyalists bury those who were killed in these devastating NATO airstrikes in a bulldozer created mass grave. It’s easy to underrstand, that these dead are not rebels, because „rebel“ deads are considered martyrs and don’t go into a mass grave, but get a hero’s burying. „Rebel“ propagandists use the pictures of the victims anyway in their usual way to fabricate anti gaddafi propaganda. But while „rebel“ propaganist „LibyaAlhurraTV“ presents the pictures of the massacred governments loyalists on Flickr as „Freedom Fighters and civilians killed by Gaddafi forces in Ajdabiya, Libya 26 March 2011“ „rebel“ propagandist „QuatchiCanada“ presents exactly the same pictures on Youtube under the title „Gaddafi’s War Crimes in Ajdabiya, Libya. March 26, 2011″ as „Ajdabiya, Libya, March 26, 2011 – Soldiers killed for refusing to fire at civilians“ and called to „send your evidence“ for Gaddafi’s crimes to the ICC.
Screenshot: Victims of Ajdabiya NATO massacre presented by QuatchiCanada intro
Screenshot: Victims of Ajdabiya NATO massacre presented by QuatchiCanada intro
Screenshot: Victims of Ajdabiya NATO massacre presented by QuatchiCanada picture
Screenshot: Victims of Ajdabiya NATO massacre presented by QuatchiCanada picture
Screenshot: Victims of Ajdabiya NATO massacre presented by LibyaAlhurraTV
Screenshot: Victims of Ajdabiya NATO massacre presented by LibyaAlhurraTV
Do you understand the pattern of the „rebels’“ propaganda? Because there is no real Gaddafi crime, the opposition uses everything hat they can find, whatever crime happens, as fake „proof“ for alleged „Gaddafi crimes“. It doesn’t matter how absurd the allegation is, the mass of fake allegations shall substitute substance.
After the NATO’s bomb massacre against the government loyalists in Ajdabiya, Libyan government forces retreated under heavy NATO bombardement hundredds of kilometers to the west, effectively abandoning protection the oil installations of Brega and Ras Lanuf and left it to the „rebels“.
March 28th, 2011: While „close air support“ from NATO bombers – given under the pretext of protecting civilians – helped the CIA led „rebels“ to conquer oil installations west of Ajdabiya US president Barack Obama gave a first major speech on TV regarding his war against Libya, and it was full of cynical lies and malicious deceit.
The US sponsored feudal dictatorship of Qatar gets it’s share of the booty. After the CIA led „rebels“ gave Qatar a contract to „market“ the rebel controlled oil, Qatar announced that it recognizes the self-appointed rebel council as the legal government of Libya. But already at the next day the robbery deal suffered a major setback.
March 29th, 2011: Muamar Gaddafi still called for a ceasefire. But the CIA led „rebels“ were not happy with just „liberating“ the oil installations west of Ajdabiya. They went further west to conquer all Libya. But already in the next village to the west, in Ben Jawad, residents of the village shot at them and chased the NATO backed „revolutionaries“ back all way down to Brega. CNN reporter Arwa Damon tweeted: „opposition fighters beat hasty retreat from town approx 100km from Sirt, say driven out by residents armed by gadhafi #libya.“ Though it was evident, that the CIA led rebellion couldn’t succeed, because the population in government held territories had been armed and NATO’s stooges didn’t lack weaponry or training, but popular support, the US led war coalition still didn’t agree to a ceasefire, but insisted on bringing their stooges to power by the way of a long lasting war.
April 1st, 2011 and following days: NATO gets desperate to conquer the booty. While the UN security council resolution 1973 allows foreign powers to use their military might to protect civilians, NATO did the opposite. NATObombed civilians to pave their CIA led stooges the way to conquer the oil installation of Brega. Besides dropping bombs from jets flying at high altitude the US also used A-10 Thunderbolt planes to provide their stooges on the ground close air support for their attack on Brega. So not even two weeks after the scandalous UNSC resolution 1973 was decided, the US had openly converted the mandate to use military force to „protect civilians“ into a mandate to conquer oil by the way of engaging in a fascist war of aggression.
April 7th, 2011: RIA Novosti reported that Algerian El Khabar newspaper quoted Algerian military sources as saying French unmanned aerial vehicles and warplanes had been searching for several days for a group of Special Forces soldiers lost in south-western Libya.
April 8th, 2011: Though the CIA led rebels got „close air support“ from scores of NATO war planes, training by US and Egypt special forces and lot’s ofmuch better weapons than the Libyan government forces ever had – like heat seeking Katyashas -, the CIA led rebels’ attack on the oil town Brega was beaten back again.
A new very old fashioned psyop is launched against Libya by UNICEF. It looks pretty much like a 2nd edition of premature babies thrown out of incubators by a bad dictator’s troops. UNICEF spokeswoman Marixie Mercado claimed UNICEF has – based on unnamed local sources – „reliable and consistent reports of children being among the people targeted by snipers in Misrata.“ But when asked for details she was „unable to say how many children have been wounded or killed in this way.“ Compare this with the report of MSF nurse Alison Criado-Perez on her medevac trip to Misrata a few days before where she mentioned exactly two badly injured children: „a boy, a child of 13, with horrific burns to his face from the explosion of a petrol bomb“ and „another young boy, only 16, who fell from a fleeing pick-up and has sustained severe head injuries.“ You may notice that these injuries sound very different from what UNICEF claims as children targeted with direct fire.
The US propaganda outlet AP described in a rare glimpse of unintended truth the real reason, why the CIA led rebels lose the battles despite strong support of the strongest military force in the world, with the three simple words: „Rebels remain outnumbered.“ The spin doctors of AP didn’t even notice, what their complain really means, that their bunch of CIA stooges, whom the US-led propaganda machine describes as a „popular revolution of the masses“ against an alleged „dictator“, „remain outnumbered.“ That nonwithstanding, U.S. Army General Carter Ham revealed, that US rulers think about the possibility to invade Libya with ground troops to overcome the obstacle of being outnumbered and enforce the planned regime change in the name of the revolutionary masses.
April 10th, 2011: Muamar Gaddafi and the Libyan government have accepted an African Union peace plan to end the fighting in Libya.
April 11th, 2011: While NATO bombs kill scores of government loyalists, many of them not in tanks, but in common sedans, rebel troops on the ground encouraged by NATO spurn the African Union cease-fire plan, vow for war until the desired NATO goal of regime change is reached. US foreign secretary Hillary Clinton repeats the regime change goal again, says the US „insists“ on Muamar Gaddafi leaving his Libyan homeland.
What are the murderous racists seen kiling black people doing right now? What are the murderers, which slaughtered the Libyan soldiers and videotaped their own crimescene for propaganda purposes, doing right now? There are a lot more horrific snuff videos created by Salafi Saudi connected „rebels“ for the propaganda pupose of blaming crimes on Gaddafi to be debunked. The rebel death squads continue their murderous false flag tour. The US yellow paper „USA today“ reports: „bound and bullet-riddled bodies of three Libyan rebels were found Sunday dumped near a rebel checkpoint east of Ajdabiya“. The key phrase here is „dumped near a rebel checkpoint“. Who is operating near rebel checkpoints? Rebels. Though torturing and murdering bound people is pretty much the pattern – see above – of some of so called rebels, and there was no hint that government forces id such things, it is claimed that this is proof for war crimes of government troops to be prosecuted at the ICC.
April 13th, 2011: General Manfred Lange, chief of staff in NATO headquarter,publicly stated, that NATO is planning the use of ground troops in Libya.
To be continued while the war against Libya continues and to expose more details of this giant crime.
Here are some questions you may try to answer yourself in the meantime: What role plays the ICC in this giant crime? What role play some ostentatively left opinion makers in western countries? Which countries didn’t like Muamar Gaddafis reasonable proposal to reorganzie the UN security council in a more just way? Elites in which countries see gains for themself when NATO gots stuck in another senseless war?
Facts about Libyan finances: Libya has proven oil reserves of 50 bln barrels which have at the current price of 100 USD per barrel a value of roughly 5.000 bln USD. As Libyan oil is very cheap to lift and close to markets, exploration of these Libyan oil reserves brings very large profits. Next to oil Libya has very interesting water resources. Before the war the Libyan state had many savings both in the country and abroad, but very few debts. Libyan investmnt strategy abroad had a clear focus on investing in Africa. So Libya is one of the most lucrative targets to rob it out.
Facts on Libyan foreign policy: Since decades the foreign policy of Libya is focused on African liberation from colonialism and imperialism and building up African unity against neocolonial forces. Libya shared resources and wealth with the people of other African countries. In neighboring countries to the south of Libya, like Chad, Mali and Mauritania, many people view Libyan revolution leader Muarmar Gaddafi as a hero of African liberation and many acitivists in the black communities abroad do so, too. Neocolonial aspirations of France to plunder Africa are disturbed by Libyan activities to unite Africa against colonialism. The United States of America and the British Kingdom are disturbed by Libya in their imperial aspirations in Africa as well and have a long history of proven operations of failed murderous regime change operations in Libya. Libya is solidaric with the Palestinian aspirations of liberation and therefore a thorn in the eye of Israel. In the past Libyan revolution leader Muamar Gaddafi publicly disputed the legitimacy of the islamic monarchs of the GCC dictatorships. He publicly mocked them along with their corrupt clerics and therefore the radical muslim movements hate him. Iran hates Muamar Gaddafi for mocking strict Islam as well as their Lebanese islamic clients do. Though Libya made in the recent years painful steps to get better foreign relations to the imperialistic NATO countries, it has also maintained friendly relations with Russia and China, but Libya was still not a client regime of the imperialists, but a souvereign power. Libya maintained the indepence which it gained 1969 by the Nasserist Fatah revolution against the imperial islamic client monarchy of the Sanussis.
Facts on Libyan history: The state of Libya is a product of colonialism. It was created by imperialist powers after world war II, when British imperialists set up an islamic monarchy to rule their poor tribal desert provinces of Tripolitana, Cyrenaica and Fezzan as a client state of NATOs empire. The US military was given a large millitary base in Libya after that client regime was established. When the Fatah revolution overthrew the islamic client regime of the NATO imperialists in 1969, with the exception of the Libyan army there was no Libyan national institutions. Shortly before oil was discovered in Libya and the oil was to be given by the islamic King to be plundered by imperialists for nothing. Libya had no industry and no working class. The dominating Libyan political affiliation was tribal loyalty. Therefore Libya lacked the basis for a western democrcy model, where the parties of the working class fight in national elections against the paties of the countries business elites. Libya consisted of poor nomade tribes. The Libyan system of justice was nothing else than tribal killings and revenge killings interrupted by peace councils between the tribes. The organisation of the political system of Libya in local councils and building the national council from representatives of the local councils reflects the still strong tribal affiliations in Libya.
Facts on Libyan interior politics: Libya is by far the most wealthiest and socially developed country of Africa. The wealth of oil is relatively well distributed among all parts of Libya. Libya has successfully fought against the plague of illiteracy and has one of the best state financed health systems in the world. Power was also shared between regions by the way of having different ministries in different regions. Libyan regions are highly autonomous in their regional decisions. The central government is very responsive to the social demands of the people, the tribes and the different regions. Whereever there were complaints on shortcomings, lots of oil money was thrown out to fix the problems. So, when recently the complain was made about housing shortcomings in Eastern Libya, appartments for 200 bln Dollars were to be created, to be given away to the people accompanied with credits without securities and very low rates. Before that there were compaints that islamic people were imprisoned on political reasons and so they were released when they renounced violence. And when people complained on abuses of human rights, monitoring bodies were set up to investigate the complaints, distinguish between propaganda and real grievances and to go after violaters and punish them. Though efforts to builld a national Libyan identity, tribal affiliations still matters. One important campaign was led by Muamar Gaddafi and was designed to fight wide spread racism against black people. About 20% of Libyan population are black and most of them originate in the tribal Tuareg regions of southern Libya which never saw the desert borders of their homelands imposed to them by colonialist powers decades ago as something legitimate. Due to his campaign fighting racism against blacks almost all of the black Libyan people in the south are very loyal to Muamar Gaddafi and many black people of the poor south serve in the Libyan security forces to earn money for a better their living. Due to the fact, that he has besides the loyalty of his own tribe the loyalty of black people on his side, Muamar Gaddafi is by far the most powerful tribal leader in a Libyan society still consisting basically of many relatively small tribes.
Facts on Libyan defense politics: Libyan defense doctrine is based on the assumption that a country with an armed people is hard to conquer. Costs of an attack against an armed people easily outweigh the possible benefits – even if the population is just six million people. Next to small arms like Kalashnikovs the weaponry consists mostly of rather old and conventional artillery which is good for conventional ground and guerilla warfare. To thwart the danger of possible coup attempts, the military is highly compartmented in various units led by sons of Muamar Gaddafi. Libya spent in recent years rather a rather few money of it’s oil wealth on the purchase of weaponry. Airforce, air defense and navy has nomically numerous pieces, but most of them are quite old and ineffective against attacks with modern NATO weapons. When Libya was threatened next to Iraq with a war of aggression by the Bush administration, it abandoned more sophisticated military programs like long range missilles and the production or purchase of weapons of mass destruction. Instead of deterrence Libya submitted to collaboration with imperialist powers in the so-called fight against terror, bought in western companies and followed world bank orders to make it’s economy more open to foreign investors, so that attempt to build up a climate an imperial aggression could be countered with economic measures against the specific warmongering imperialist power. Libya did invest in measures to counter information warfare on a national level by hardening information structures needed to inform the Libyan public on the stance of the Libyan government, but – unlike Qatar, Iran, Russia, China, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela and many more – Libya did not invest in a large media presence on the international stage, which might be seen as a threatening messianic propaganda effort by rulers of other countries.

Simon Peres: psicópata

Esto es de Febrero, y parece que este criminal de guerra y terrorista en sus tiempos mozos, se sabía muy bien la película y su fin.
Lo llama ironía de la historia, pero para mí es algo más.


Hay que recordar que por esas fechas no había empezado la "guerra"

domingo, 23 de octubre de 2011

Hillary Clinton: la psicópata




Es eso un veni, vidi vicci romano? La emperatriz lo ha dicho!

Muammar Ghaddafi alive ?

Después de tantas mentiras, después del comentario de Clinton, después de tantas falsas capturas de hijos y familiares del Ghaddafi, después de lafamos falsa entrada en Tripoli, después de las falsas manifestaciones en contra de Ghaddafi en Tripoli, uno se pregunta si es verdad lo que se publica de su muerte.
Pero vivo o muerto, da igual, la causa sigue en pie( articulo de MATHABA)


Qaddafi Not Dead

Posted: 2011/10/21
From: Mathaba
    Share on TwitterFacebook
Mathaba Editorial on the "Death" of Muammar Qaddafi


People have been so worried as to whether the Leader of the World Revolution, Muammar Qaddafi of Libya, is dead or alive. Let us examine this question, and reach some definitive positions based upon the Third Universal Theory, which Muammar Qaddafi championed.

First, let us consider why it matters, or does not matter. To the terrorists attacking Africa's Libya, NATO, the mercenaries and the "Islamist" rats it matters, because that has been their key number one objective, from which all else follows. For them Qaddafi = Libya = Jamahiriya.

NATO, the American-European military alliance has dug itself into a corner from day one, because their first aim was to kill Qaddafi, and the reasons for them wanting to do so have been explained in countless other analysis articles here on Mathaba.Net.

From the start of the NATO bombing, which they thought would take 2 to 3 days to achieve its objective of killing Qaddafi, later revised to 2-3 weeks, then 2-3 months, and then "indefinitely", Mathaba stated that NATO would not be able to do so.

On the very day of their biggest ever failure, when they went in an all-out massive desperate bombing of Qaddafi's home which he still would not run away from, in order for the Rome meeting of Clinton to be able to declare a victory, it backfired when he went out to feed the animals, and instead his 3 grandchildren and youngest son died along with many others.

That damaging news was immediately squashed by the sudden release within a few hours, of the "death of Bin Laden", so as to deflect world media away from sympathy for Qaddafi and his family, and toward the power and might of the USA. Only problem is, on the web, people quickly figured out that this was not Bin Laden who was dumped at sea, let alone the problem that he had died many years earlier.

But that did not matter, because 99% of tell-lie-vision (TV) viewers believed it, just as they did when Obama's White House came up with his forged birth certificate, which later proved as evidenced by traces left in the history of the file uploaded to the White House web site, to be a fake because it had been edited, not only scanned.

Understand that the "international media" meaning this crowd, always get their way, because most people get their news and influence from there. They report a lie ad infinitum (such as the "Libya did Lockerbie" lie) but when the opposite is proven to be the case (witnesses admitted being paid $4million each and recanted their evidence), that "new" news is either not reported, or reported only in passing, on some small inner pages or paragraph.

Now we have the reasons and timing for Qaddafi's "death", before we address whether he is actually dead or not, and why he is dead and is not dead.

Reasons include that a recent internal NATO and CIA review of the war on Libya revealed it to be a mess and a pathetic failure. Not only had Qaddafi continued to survive, but he was getting more famous by the day, and with that, the danger of his ideas and example, being discovered. More on that in a while.

Further, the objectives, to control Libya, it's oil and water, and to separate it from the rest of Africa, also failed abysmally, even though they cut off all Libyan broadcasting stations, both TV and Internet, bybombing, denial of service attacks, hacking, and threats -- the green resistance continued especially in central Libya.

This, in spite of non-stop bombing, missile and terrorist attacks, and a total blockade and siege and then destruction of democratic Jamahiriya cities where the population were holding out, and where the "rebels" could not enter: mass starvation and total destruction ensued, bombing of hospitals, and over 60,000 dead.

Yet still those civilians in those towns, armed to defend themselves, did not give in to NATO bombs and terrorist rockets and assassinations. Then NATO in desperation started to use banned weapons, mini nukes, chemicals, and "poor man's" fuel bombs, resulting in further large-scale massacres, in the past week.

The world media was about to be unable to ignore this any further although they had been silent during months of atrocities and blockades, with photos now emerging in recent days, showing a townutterly destroyed with bodies littering the streets. An urgent distraction was again needed.

With in-fighting in recent weeks between the rebels, monarchists, kleptomaniacs, criminals, 'al-Qaida' and mercenary groups all initially united only in their hatred for Qaddafi now falling apart and in open confrontation with mass resignations from among their ranks and leadership, something needed to be done.

With NATO pilots and drone operators realising that there is indeed a very real danger of them having to face justice for war crimes andcrimes against humanity, and with pilot fatigue and dissatisfaction creeping in as after 8 months of non-stop aerial bombing the truth has become known to them that they are not there to protect civilians but instead to bomb them, something had to be done.

Hillary Clinton needed to visit Tripoli, to "rally the troops", and provide a brave face for the Europeans who were increasingly worried about being on the forefront of a war that they have started to realize they cannot win, and which will ultimately backfire, for many reasons already covered here on Mathaba.Net and elsewhere.

So, the big white lady descended on Libya for a few hours and spoke,calling for the capture or death of Muammar Qaddafi, knowing that as with Bin Laden, the videos and images were already prepared. Lo and behold, presto, a day later, "Qaddafi" was both captured and killed.

Yes, he is now dead, for the world media. And the incredibly and deliberately shaky videos, prove it, as do the doctored still images. No one, especially not Obama, needs to declare Qaddafi dead, for the rebel "TNC" so-called Transitional National Council (or what is left of it, less than a dozen people), said it is so, and Jazeera and Al-Arabiya as well as PRESS TV and Russia Today echoed the "news" as fact.

Problem is, he is also not dead. Not only because he was not captured and not killed, as reported elsewhere here from reliable sources, but because he already lives in the hearts of millions. And this now brings us to the next point, as to in which ways Qaddafi is dead or alive, and whether and how much it matters.

Qaddafi is alive. It matters, because NATO has thus not won the war, and not even won their first "easy" objective. It matters because some people need a leader and won't operate without that leader: the large numbers of volunteers converging on Libya from around Africa, are not all going there for reasons of defending Libya, Libyans, or even Africa, but because of their love, appreciation and solidarity for Qaddafi and wanting to help him as the "Brother Leader".

Yet, even though Qaddafi did not die and most people still have not woken up to the fact that we live in a digital world where all images, videos, and sound, can easily be forged -- not only by easily available commercial image and sound manipulation software, but by military grade programs and super-computers.

People have not woken up to the fact that the very "main stream" media they have come to rely on, as well as their political leaders, have less education, less common sense, and less experience, than one would expect, and thus are also easily misled.

But one day, Qaddafi will die, and in that sense is already dead, as the rest of us are too. However, he has lived to see his philosophy actually put into practice, something very few philosophers in the world have ever had the privilege of. Sadly, he has also lived to see it destroyed. But no quite.

What has been destroyed, is Libya, but not the Jamahiriya: not the values, ideals, and democratic, economic and social relationships that have proven to be so strong as to withstand the world's most powerful and brutal military forces for almost a year, and still hold out. And this has resulted in a great opportunity, as we shall see.

The entire world faces a cross-roads over the coming year, and we remember the New Year message from Mathaba on 28th January 2011 saying that this would be the most important year ever:

As we start 2011 this is going to be a most important year for future life on this planet. It is essential to STAY INFORMED, and SHARE what you know with others. Mathaba, as the world's leading independent news agency is playing an important part in giving people the tools for making the world a better place. 

That cross-roads, now has a chance of taking the right turn, because the very key solutions to those problems facing the world, were being ignored and Mathaba was a lone voice in the wilderness talking about the Third Universal Theory. Now however, thanks to the war on Libya and the attacks on Qaddafi, people the world over are asking what it is that is going on -- it is clear to all that it is not about protecting civilians, and has led to millions reading The Green Book.

Further, hardly anyone outside Libya knew anything about the Jamahiriya, about how all power, wealth and arms were in the hands of the people in Libya, or that Qaddafi had handed power to the people in 1979 two years after the creation of the Jamahiriya, and the introduction of direct, participatory democracy.

This, and the amazing economic benefits that resulted from it, are the reason that even during NATO bombing he could go around Tripoli in an open air car and no one would shoot at him, without any real security, as shown in this video shot during April this year, one month into the bombing of his home.

Other truths started to surface, and resulted in millions of people world wide posting videos, articles, and comments on social media. Truths such as these.

Now, what is to be done, and what is Muammar to do? Actually, he has been trying to tell everyone who has been listening these past many months, a few key points and yet from what we see, it is not getting through to everyone, even those who are his fans around the world, and which we summarize here below:

* I am not the Libyan resistance, the Libyan resistance is the people. They will continue to fight, until NATO and all others against them, leave Libya. They will lay down their lives to defend their freedom, as will many of my own family. I live in their hearts, and in the hearts of millions.

* I am not the government of Libya, I do not hold any official government positions. I am a revolutionary. I am outside of power. Power rests with the Libyan people.

* I have spoken all my words, so many times, until I grew tired. "It is all there in the pages of The Green Book. Please read it and you will understand."

* I have completed my work, I gave power, wealth and arms to the people, who possess it. I am just one man among millions in Libya.

* I brought to light the Third Universal Theory. It is as if mankind had become locked in a cave without sunlight, and forgotten what sun light looked like. I found the rusty keys on the floor, and put them in the lock. Thus all that is needed is to turn the key to come out into the sunlight again.

* The Green Book is a collection of truths, showing the way for solving the problems of power via democracy, wealth via socialism, and the social basis of the Third Universal Theory. As the farmer, I did not create the fruits, but picked them from the tree and placed them into a basket, The Green Book.

The above are an English language para-phrasing of some of the things he has said. During the current conflict he also gave clear advice:

* I will never give up on Libya, I will fight to the end, I will not run nor leave my home land.

* NATO will have to leave, they can never occupy Libya, they will never live in peace stealing our wealth.

* The (rebels) will not last one day without NATO, so they should make peace now while they have a chance.

* Do not trust the media, they will say I have said this or that, that I have died, or that I am here or there. They lie, and are easily manipulated, so do not trust them.

* No orders are needed, come out into the streets, clean the country from the rats until the green flag of freedom is flying everywhere again.

So, why does anyone need to hear from him yet again? What difference does it make if he is alive in freedom, or dies in freedom? Either way, is victory. Either way, is a motivation to those who love him. If he is alive, they are motivated, if he is martyred they are motivated.

Why are people avoiding getting on with the real work to hand, which is to, among other things:

* Study The Green Book and put it into practice, forming green charter committees everywhere and calling for people's conferences.
* Organize and mobilize, hold rallies with green flags, videos, posters, t-shirts, or even travel to Africa to defend the Jamahiriya.
* Get out there and spread the truth, call others, wake them up, show them the evidence, recruit more members to the movement.
* Report your actions, submit rally, meeting, protest, or other reports and statements via pub.mathaba.net
* Network with others, using open source tools such as mathaba.info

The Green Charter Movement will soon be launching a wiki in addition on its web site, which will explain many of the concepts, definitions, and structures of the movement.

Remember, even though the Leader is at the time of this writing still very much alive in more ways than one, he does not need to speak: all has already been spoken and written, it is now up to us all to hear those calls and put them into practice, and then in future if the time is right and we have finally done something along the way of building a Universal Jamahiriya, he may choose to address us again. For now, let the enemies of freedom remain confused and fearful, while we move forward united and strong, and continue the green march to people's power as a solution to the problems of corruption, exploitation, oppression, war, need and greed.

Some of the following tasks are still very much outstanding, and all should now become involved in the work:

* Registering sufficient numbers of people atwww.peoplesconference.org/reg so that people's conferences can be formed in various areas. The IPCO will contact everyone when the time is right and there is something to report, a publication called "World Conference" is planned.

* Adopting the Green Charter for the interim, and spreadingwww.greencharter.com so that the green charter movement will grow world wide and show the way forward to people's power (Jamahiriya) everywhere.

* Making sure that all those who have committed crimes are held to account, see www.peoplesconference.org/cah -- and assisting with the creation of a world crimes data base at www.worldcrimes.org as well as the entering of data into it and the organization of World People's Conferences on Crimes Against Humanity to be held in 8 locations around the world, by March 2012.

* Collecting funds for all the above, to assist with expenses, publicity, donate via the website www.peoplesconference.org as well aswww.mathaba.net/donate.htm

* Forming International Solidarity Committees around the world to coordinate an effective mass migration toward whatever location is decided time and place, to put and end to the war and rebuild the Jamahiriya, or otherwise to create a new Jamahiriya, with this formation to be coordinated by IPCO.

* Join the mailing lists and any other means of staying informed, such as www.mathaba.net/support and www.mathaba.net/go/daily

* Costing and Production of T-shirts, Posters, green flags, green books (Green Charter International has ISBN and copy right and printers, funds are needed to print)

* Building of alternative and independent communication networks, which will continue to function without electrical grid, Internet, or phones

* www.mathaba.com is to be launched as a central point linking the various official sites and tools for the interim
#
 Twitter Facebook

viernes, 14 de octubre de 2011

Cuando lo ministros de defensa de la OTAN no saben qué hacer con Libia, ni en Libia.

El video es de cuando la señora Clinton fue a Paris.  No sé si habría algún becario a disposición, o era simplemente Sarkozy.




Meses después, están igual o peor. Ni la Otan, ni nadie saben como salir de esa locura donde se han metido.
Especialmente el ministro francés de defensa. Entre él y su jefe que querían pasar a la historia, deberían pasar por la guillotina.
Lo siento, está en francés, y estando tan barata la palabra de traducción, mejor buscar una máuina que lo haga. No va a ser igual, pero...


Interview de Jacques Borde sur la Libye, la résistance et la reconquête

Libye – Bienvenue dans la « Somalie de la Sarkozie » !
Q – L’Otan et ses alliés n’ont-ils pas crié victoire trop tôt après la chute de Tripoli ?
Jacques Borde – Assurément. C’est une évidence ! Ce d’autant que si Tripoli a été prise, et si l’essentiel des villes du pays sont bien en train de passer dans le camp des insurgés pro-occidentaux, cette mainmise n’est, encore aujourd’hui, que partielle. Rien ne nous dit, d’ailleurs, qu’elle puisse être, à court et moyen terme, autre chose ! Certains sites et repassant même pour un temps sous le contrôle de la Résistance kadhafiste. Comme cela a été le cas pour pour Ras-Lanouf et Bréga. Or, évidemment, ça n’est pas comme ça qu’on se remplit le mieux les poches ! Du coup, du côté des dépeceurs (occidentaux) de la Libye, et en dépit des apparences, le moral n’est pas au beau fixe. Loin de là. Mais, ça n’est pas moi qui en parle le mieux, mais l’un des plus forcenés interventionnistes sur ce dossier. J’ai nommé le controversé – et assez peu à sa place – ministre français de la Défense, Gérard Longuet.
Q – Par « assez peu à sa place », vous voulez dire peu compétent ?
Jacques Borde – Oui. Pour ne pas dire complètement dépassé. L’ancien d’Occident1, ressorti du placard par Nicolas Sarkozy, a – par ses propos de plus en plus creux, son manque de vision à long terme, sa piètre connaissance des choses militaires – démontré qu’il n’avait rien à faire à la tête d’un ministère de force, comme disaient les Soviétiques, aussi important que celui de la Défense.
Q – Militairement parlant, la situation n’est pas stabilisée ?
Jacques Borde – Tout dépend de ce que vous entendez par stabilisation. Bien sûr, si – comme à Kaboul – contrôler une partie du pays suffit à vos ambitions, oui ! Évidemment, si vous entendez remettre en route l’économie libyenne, pour vous en mettre plein les poches, là, non !
Q – Pourquoi cela ?
Jacques Borde – Parce que, territorialement parlant, le nouveau pouvoir ne contrôle pas grand-chose. Et fort mal, en plus. Au point – c’est Allain Jules qui s’en fait l’écho sur lavoixdelalibye.co – qu’un chef d’État, partie au conflit aurait dit aux insurgés occidentaux : « Si on tue tous les Libyens, vous pensez gouverner des arbres (…) ? L’heure pour la paix a sonné et vous avez la responsabilité de pacifier votre pays au lieu de compter sur les armes ».
Contrairement aux allégations du CNT, Khamis Kadhafi, est, bel et bien, vivant. Il a même donné au CNT, à côté de ses entretiens réguliers à des media arabes, un ultimatum pour quitter… Tripoli ! Évidemment, c’est, avant tout, de la guerre psychologique. Mais, imaginez l’effet, sur une population à qui on ne cesse d’annoncer sa mort tous les deux ou trois jours !
Q – Quid des engagements sur le terrain ?
Jacques Borde – Dans la capitale, il y a eu des attaques visant les bureaux, officieux, de l’Otan et de la CIA, et du CNT. Tout cela ne fait pas très sérieux de la part d’autorités qui demandent qu’on leur confie les milliards confisqués à la Libye. Pire, Misrata, si affrontements il y a, ceux-ci se déroulent entre fractions rebelles. Sans parler d’action de la, désormais, Résistance loyaliste.
À Benghazi, il n’est même pas certain que Moustapha Abdeljalil soit, de manière permanente, là où il affirme être. On le comprend : une fatwa contre sa personne a été émise. Il va, à terme, sans doute, faire comme Karzaï à Kaboul : s’offrir – si l’Occident, bien sûr, lui en donne les moyens – une garde prétorienne. Des Contractors qu’il lui faudra, probablement, payer rubis sur l’ongle. La privatisation de la guerre reste, avant tout, un business !
Q – Mais Benghazi est sous contrôle du CNT, non ?
Jacques Borde – Pour partie, seulement. Les plus pessimistes – mais ce sont les plus pessimistes, évidemment – affirment que 50% des quartiers de la vile échappent aux insurgés pro-occidentaux. Qui, de toute manière, ne s’entendent pas entre eux. Là, c’est Beyrouth, années 70-80 ! Dans certains quartiers, le drapeau vert est, à nouveau, hissé. Sans; bien sûr, qu’on sache qu’il s’agit de véritables ralliements ou de simples provocations. Beyrouth, je vous dis !
À Zawiya, le dépôt d’armes et de munitions installé par l’Otan, fort mal gardé par les insurgés pro-occidentaux, a été « visité » (sic), par les loyalistes qui ont récupéré nombre d’armes. En fait, dans la région, la seule véritable zone réellement sous contrôle insurgé est l’Aéroport de Tripoli. Quelque part, tout cela rappelle confusément le Liban (des années 80) où les différents camps se servaient allègrement dans les stocks mis à disposition de l’Armée libanaise par les États-Unis. Mais, aussi, Bagdad, où, longtemps, les seules zones véritablement sous contrôle des l’occupant, étaient l’aéroport et la Zone verte. Point barre !
Q – Pour vous, quel est le plus gros problèmes du nouveau pouvoir ?
Jacques Borde – Au plan militaire, vous voulez dire ? Le problème des effectifs. Les insurgés n’ont jamais eu vraiment de forces régulières. Si vous voulez, cela rappelle – toutes proportions gardées, bien sûr – la Vendée militaire, où des irréguliers, certes motivés, prenaient les armes mais repartaient chez eux, quand bon leur semblait. Il y a bien des combattants. Mais pas d’unités régulières et enrégimentées. Ou beaucoup trop peu. Quant à l’expérience !… Et puis, contrairement aux Vendéens, il n’y a guère de chefs militaires dignes de ce nom.
Un exemple significatif vous permettra de mieux comprendre. Quelques 1.000 combattants du CNT sont toujours introuvables depuis les revers enregistrés à Syrte et Bani Walid. Ce ne sont pas des tués ou des blessés, dans leur majorité. Ni même des déserteurs, au sens de troupiers régnicoles délaissant les rangs d’unités militaires traditionnelles aux effectifs et missions clairement définis. Mais des gens qui ont dû, tout simplement, rentrer chez eux ! Normal, après HUIT mois de conflit (mars, avril, mai, juin, juillet, août, septembre, octobre). Conscient de la chose, le CNT voudrait bien recruter des….mercenaires. Mais, là, chasse gardée ! C’est Washington qui décide de l’implication des Sociétés militaires privées (SMP) !
Q – Et Syrte ?
Jacques Borde – L’intéressant, à Syrte, est que les Otaniens y commettent strictement les exactions qu’ils prétendaient – je parle, là, des raisons officiellement avancées à la via vactis sur la Libye, bien sûr – empêcher à Benghazi. À savoir l’épuration politico-ethnique de la ville. Même l’hôpital de la ville aurait vu son alimentation en eau coupée suite aux Guernica des armées de l’air occidentales.
Q – Et Kadhafi ?
Jacques Borde – Après avoir affirmé que Kadhafi se trouvait, sans autre précisions, à Gadhamès, retranché dans la mosquée de la ville, le CNT a demandé à l’Otan de bombarder le site ! Les Otaniens ont, bien évidemment, refusé ! Craignant, surtout, que les loyalistes ne choisissent, alors, de passer en Tunisie et/ou en Algérie, toutes proches…
Q – Sinon, qu’a donc dit Longuet sur la Libye ?
Jacques Borde – Peu de choses sensées en vérité. Mais, avec une naïveté désarmante, il nous a, malgré lui, fourni un compte-rendu, des plus révélateurs, de la récente réunion des ministres de la Défense de l’Union européenne à Wroclaw (Pologne), où, selon lui, l’ambiance était « un peu pesante »2. En fait, au sortir du dîner, Gérard Longuet, s’est confié à quelques journalistes, dont Bruxelles2.eu. À l’entendre, la réunion avait un côté assez surréaliste. « On avait l’impression, à entendre l’ordre du jour, qu’il ne s’était rien passé »3.
Q – Diable, rien passé en Libye ! Le constat est amer ?
Jacques Borde – Amer, mais pas aussi faux qu’il pourrait paraître. En effet, que nous dit encore le Longuet-à-la-triste figure ? Que « La plupart des pays n’ont pas joué de rôle dans la Libye. Et chacun regardait un peu ses chaussures – sauf la France, les Britanniques, la Belgique… les Pays-Bas – en se disant qu’ils étaient passés, à un moment, à côté de l’histoire, se demandant comment ils pourraient faire maintenant, sans vraiment savoir comment faire »4.
Passons sur le couplet de « passés (…) à côté de l’Histoire », qui n’est jamais qu’une forme d’onanisme géopolitique aggravé, dont nous laissons l’entière responsabilité à ceux qui s’y prêtent. Quelques-uns ont, à l’évidence, revisité la via factis otanienne sur la Libye, comme un occasion de revivre, à revers, leurs fantasmes les plus rances de l’aventure algérienne. Hélas, que leur dire ? Sinon que la Libye de 2011 n’a que peu de rapport avec que que fut la Guerre (dite) d’Algérie.
Mais que nous rappellent les propos de Longuet ? Qu’à l’évidence :
1.Du point de vue de ceux qui se sont jetés, un peu vite, sur la proie libyenne, il ne s’est, effectivement, « rien passé » ! Ou, pour le moins RIEN passé comme prévu. Dans la mesure où RIEN n’est réglé en Libye. Au point que l’Otan a dû prolonger ses opérations d’un trimestre supplémentaire. Cela sans jamais dire que ce trimestre permettrait de clore le dossier libyen aux mieux des ses dépeceurs. Oui. De ce point de vue-là, il ne s’est « rien passé » en Libye…
2.Du côté, des convives aux agapes de Wroclaw, l’ambiance avait, effectivement, de quoi être « pesante » ; privés qu’ils étaient, à l a fois, de leur plat de résistance et de leur dessert : le pétrole, le gaz et l’eau libyens. Et, pour ceux, s’étant joints (un peu vite) à la curée, la perspective de continuer des opérations militaires assez douteuses, à l’éclairage d’insurgés pro-occidentaux, rentrant chez eux – qui à Benghazi, qui à Misrata – au motif que les loyalistes leur tendent de coûteuses embuscades. Évidemment, lorsque les mots-clés revenant sur le tapis, sont « enlisement », « bourbier », le convive a moins l’esprit à la fête…
3.« La plupart des pays n’ont pas joué de rôle dans la Libye ». L’avantage des incapables est qu’il sont, souvent, aussi des candides. Et, là, tirons notre chapeau à Gérard Longuet ! Eh, oui ! Merci de nous rappeler que la Guerre Libye n’est pas celle de l’Europe dans son entier, mais seulement celle d’une poignée d’État (moins de CINQ sur VINGT-SEPT), auxquels il convient d’ajouter les deux monarchies – comprendre tout sauf des démocraties – qatarie et émiratie (ou émirienne). Et le Canada5 qui n’est pas une puissance européenne, sauf mouvement tectonique de grande ampleur. Mais, là, on en aurait entendu parler !
4. Et Longuet, histoire de ne pas en rater une d’ajouter qu’il faut être conscient que « la Politique européenne de sécurité et de défense n’est pas sortie par le haut de cette épreuve ». Merci, M. le ministre de m’ôter, ainsi, les mots de la bouche : « On ne peut dire qu’une initiative bilatérale, pour appliquer la résolution des Nations-unies, soit vraiment la consécration de la politique de défense européenne ». Qu’ajouter de plus, en effet ?
Q – Doit-on ramener le sommet dînatoire de Wroclaw à ces seuls aspects ?
Jacques Borde – Oui et non, j’en ai peur. Car, pour l’avenir, la montagne eurolandienne a accouché d’une souris, maigrelette qui plus est ! Ceci dit, écouter Longuet n’est pas sans intérêt, loin s’en faut. En effet, que nous a encore dit le ministre français de la Défense, à propos de la Libye ? Que « Pour faire émerger un État de droit complet, durable c’est autre chose. Et ce n’est pas le rôle de l’Otan ». J’aimerai que l’on s’arrête sur cette phrase qui est, certainement, l’une des plus importantes jamais prononcées à propos de la via factis occidentale sur la Libye, depuis le début des opérations ! Car, si ça n’est pas le rôle de l’Otan que de « faire émerger un État de droit complet, durable – et, encore une fois, ça n’est pas moins qui le dit mais Candide Longuet, affligeant de franchise – :
1.Que fiche donc l’Alliance atlantique en Libye, puisqu’à l’évidence la protection des populations civiles de villes comme Benghazi, Misrata, etc (raison même de son engagement en Libye, rappelons-le) n’est plus d’actualité, ayant laissé place, depuis plusieurs semaines déjà, à des frappes massives et indiscriminées sur des populations que rien de menaçait, puis que majoritairement acquises au régime et n’ayant pas pris les armes (contre qui que ce soit, d’ailleurs) ?
2.Plus important encore, que cherche-t-elle à y « faire émerger », si ça n’est pas un « État de droit complet, durable » ? Une monarchie ? Un Émirat islamique ? Une clérouquie à la solde de la thalassocratie états-unienne ? Un État de non droit, alors ? Calqué sur ces banlieues françaises où les forces de l’ordre n’osent plus pénétrer, sauf à mobiliser des centaines d’hommes ? Les citoyens des puissances engagées dans la via factis contre la Libye ont, tout de même, le droit de savoir que que nous faisons là-bas, si ça n’est même pas pour y jeter les bases d’un « État de droit ». Non ?
Autre chose à noter : les agapes indigestes de Wroclaw, auraient eu raison de la nouvelle mission européenne en Libye, imaginée par certains. Apparemment, le sujet ne serai plus de la brulante actualité dont nous parlaient certains. Or si pour Longuet, « Il faut accompagner la Libye, dans la mesure où elle le demande, dans le respect de la pleine responsabilité du CNT à qui il appartient ses objectifs », le ministre n’a « pas ressenti le besoin du CNT de voir quiconque se mêler des moyens d’autorité. Il ne veut même pas de forces de police ». Résultat, « On en reste aux vœux pieux », car, dixit Longuet, « l’UE n’est pas un acteur de complicité immédiate du nouveau pouvoir ». C’est, curieux, c’est pourtant l’impression que cela donne à beaucoup de gens !
Q – Mais, au fond, sur le dossier libyen, tout le monde semble tirer la couverture à lui ?
Jacques Borde – C’est tout à fait exact. Et, là, pas de quartier, il s’agit, d’abord, de penser à soi. Et seulement à soi. Ainsi, le Globe & Mail n’a pas manqué de noter que le président américain, Barack H. Obama, évoquant à l’Onu la Guerre de Libye, s’il n’a pas manqué de de féliciter ses alliés au sein de l’Otan et « plus particulièrement la Grande Bretagne, la France, le Danemark et la Norvège »6, a omis – tout comme le leader du CNT libyen – de mentionner le rôle du Canada. Ce alors que l’intervention de l’Otan a bien été placé sous la direction d’un officier supérieur canadien, le lieutenant-général Charles Bouchard, et que les CF-18 frappés de la feuille d’érable ont bien été responsables de 8% des missions d’attaque.
Ficelle un peu grosse, direz-vous ! Certes. À cela près qu’elle offre le mérite de limiter le rôle des Nord-Américains à cette guerre aux seuls États-Unis. Toujours ça de pris !
Q – Pourquoi, ce comportement ?
Jacques Borde – Mais tout simplement parce que les places seront chères, dans la nouvelle Libye, quel que puisse être son visage ! Gardez à l’esprit que cette guerre n’a pas été faite pour les Libyens, leur bien -être, leurs aspirations. Mais pour leurs richesses ! Plus précisément, celles de son sous-sol. C’est bien pour ça, que Barack H. Obama, s’empresse de faire oublier le rôle des Canadiens. Inutile de faire quoi que ce soit pour les Libyens aient les yeux fixés sur le pays au monde – qui, avec la France – dispose de la meilleure expertise en matière de gestion des ressources en eau, la troisième des richesses libyennes, ne l’oublions pas. Or, nous savons, d’ores et déjà, que les rebelles – visiblement plus « cigales » que « fourmis » – ont passablement endommagé les structures de la Grande rivière, projet kadhafiste par excellence !
Mais, après tout, ceux-ci n’ont qu’à s’en prendre qu’à eux-mêmes. Rien n’obligeait vraiment les Canadiens à ce rôle de harkis de l’hegemon états-unien…
Q – Quant aux appétits US, puisque nous y sommes, y-a-t-il une différence entre Démocrates et Républicains ?
Jacques Borde – L’épaisseur d’une feuille de papier à cigarette. Et encore ! Contrairement aux idées (fausses) que nourrit le boboland germanopratin à l’endroit de l’actuel président américain, Barack H. Obama – relativement à son prédécesseur, George W. Bush, je veux dire – l’approche géopolitique de n’importe quel locataire de la Maison-Blanche sera toujours la défense la plus acharnée des intérêts US, tels que définis sur les rives du Potomac. Et pas ailleurs, contrairement à ce que croient quelques conspirationnistes. De plus, les États-Unis n’ont pas habitude faire marche-arrière. La progression hégémonique est constante : Reagan était plus dur que Carter ; William J. Clinton plus tenace que Bush Sr. ; George W. Bush plus menteur que Clinton et Obama se montrera plus intraitable que ses prédécesseurs auraient pu l’être sur la question de la Libye. C’est la marche (toujours) en avant de l’hegemon.
Q – Quel rôle rôle joue Hillary Clinton ?
Jacques Borde – Celui qui lui a été dévolu dans le partage des tâches avec Barack H. Obama. Pas vraiment le rôle d’un Bisounours. En fait, davantage celui d’un pitbull femelle. Je sais, des analystes mal-informés nuanceraient probablement le portrait du US Secretary of State (chef de la diplomatie), la Sénatrice Hillary D. Rodham Clinton. Mais ne nous leurrons pas. Dès qu’il s’agira de préserver les acquis US en Libye – qui, contrairement à ce que croient beaucoup, ne datent pas d’hier – Dame Hillary ne lâchera rien. Ses admirateurs devraient méditer les propos de l’ancien vice-président US, Richard Dick Cheney, qui s’exprimant au micro de Fox News Sunday 7, déplorait qu’Hillary Clinton ne soit pas présidente des États-Unis en lieu et place de Barack Obama !
Qui plus est, ne nous trompons pas sur le personnage. Elle a les dents aussi longues que les néo-cons, dont elle partage une partie non négligeable des convictions. Un petit exemple, si vous le voulez bien, qui vous éclairera sur le personnage : qui Erik Prince, le patron de Blackwater (Xe, désormais) – passant devant le House Oversight & Government Reform Committee présidé par Henry Arnold Waxman, en 2007 – prendra-t-il pour l’assister ? BKSH, la société de conseil politique dirigée par Mark Penn ? Ce nom ne vous dit rien ? Dommage ! Mark Penn avait été le stratège en chef de Hillary Clinton. Certains spécialistes le surnommant le « Rove de Hillary »8.
Penn, pourtant clintonien pur jus, défendant Blackwater, la plus grosse Société militaire privée (SMP) US du moment, dans une sordide affaire de massacres de civils irakiens (l’Affaire de la Place Nissour). Gageons que lorsqu’il s’agira de lâcher plus encore les chiens de guerre des SMP US sur la Libye, pour s’y réserver l’essentiel des richesses, le US Secretary of State Hillary D. Rodham Clinton n’aura pas beaucoup d’états d’âme. Ni à trop farfouiller dans son carnet d’adresses !…
Q – Quid de la reconstruction de la Libye, alors ?
Jacques Borde – Parmi les mauvaises fées à se pencher sur la Libye, tout le monde a fait mine d’oublier un acteur-clé : le FMI. Certes, l’attention a été, pour partie, détournées, par les foucades sexuelles (et printanières) de son ex-directeur-général, Dominique Strauss-Khan, mais tout de même. Or, guère de doutes à avoir : le FMI, fera tout pour que la Libye, franchisse les étapes nécessaires à son asservissement, c’est-à-dire :
1.Ouvre grandes ses portes aux multinationales, US de préférence ;
2.Privatise les entreprises publiques les plus rentables ;
3.Endette un pays qui ne l’avait plus été depuis la (vraie) révolution des Officiers libre et l’arrivée au pouvoir du plus emblématique d’entre eux, Mouammar Kadhafi ;
4.Mette à bas l’État providence qui assurait éducation, santé et emploi aux Libyen lambda.
Q – Vous ne noircissez pas le tableau ?
Jacques Borde – Non. Pas le moins du monde. Prenez le Nigeria. Une éponge à pétrole. Mais, aussi, l’un des pays les plus pauvres au monde. Ce qui attend les Libyens est, je le crains du même tonneau. Un pillage systématique, des plans structuraux imposés par le FMI. Et soupe à la grimace – voire : pas de soupe du tout – pour la population.
Q – Vous avez, brièvement, évoqué la question de l’eau..
Jacques Borde – Tout à fait. Mais permettez-moi de vous citer ce qu’en dit, Manlio Dinucci, « En plus de l’or noir, les multinationales européennes et étasuniennes visent l’or blanc libyen : l’immense réserve d’eau fossile de la nappe nubienne (estimée à 150.000 km3), qui s’étend sous la Libye, l’Égypte, le Soudan et le Tchad. Les possibilités de développement qu’elle offre ont été démontrées par la Libye, qui a construit un réseau d’aqueducs de 4.000 km de long (qui a coûté 25 Md$US) pour transporter l’eau, extraite en profondeur par 1.300 puits dans le désert, jusqu’aux villes côtières (Benghazi ayant été une des premières servies) et à l’oasis de Koufra, en fertilisant les terres désertiques. Ce n’est pas un hasard si, en juillet, l’Otan a bombardé l’aqueduc et détruit la fabrique, près de Bréga, qui produisait les conduites nécessaires aux réparations »9.
Q – Mais pourquoi les détruire ?
Jacques Borde – Mais, comme en Irak, pour mieux reconstruire (en se faisant payer fort cher) ce qui a été détruit ! Et, « C’est sur ces réserves hydriques, en perspective plus précieuses encore que les pétrolifères, que veulent mettre la main -à travers les privatisations promues par le FMI – les multinationales de l’eau, surtout françaises (Suez, Veolia et autres) qui contrôlent presque la moitié du marché mondial de l’eau privatisée. Et pour réparer l’aqueduc et les infrastructures, les multinationales étasuniennes comme Kellogg Brown & Root, spécialisées dans la reconstruction de ce que les bombes USA/Otan détruisent, sont prêtes à s’en occuper : en Irak et Afghanistan elles ont reçu en deux années des contrats d’un montant d’environ 10 milliards de dollars »10.
Q – Mais qui va payer ?
Jacques Borde – Les Libyens, pardi ! Avec les fonds souverains libyens, d’abord. Manlio Dinucci les estime à, « environ, 70 milliards de dollars plus d’autres investissements extérieurs pour un total de 150 Md$US »11. Une fois « décongelés », et avec les nouveaux revenus de l’exportation pétrolière (environ 30 Md$US annuels avant la guerre), « Ils seront gérés par la nouvelle Central Bank of Libya , qui avec l’aide du FMI sera transformée en une filiale de HSBC (Londres), de Goldman Sachs (New York) et d’autres banques multinationales d’investissement. Elles pourront de cette façon pénétrer encore plus en Afrique, où ces fonds sont investis dans plus de 25 pays, et miner les organismes financiers indépendants de l’Union africaine – la Banque centrale, la Banque d’investissement et le Fonds monétaire – nés surtout grâce aux investissements libyens.
Q – Mais les Libyens ne seront, sans doute, pas d’accord ?
Jacques Borde – Mais, d’où sortez-vous que quelqu’un leur demandera leur avis ! Primo, les fonds souverains libyens sont déjà sous tutelle occidentale. Ils ne seront donc, réellement, restitués qu’au coup à coup et en fonction des contrats signés. Un scenario type : Xe (la SMP de Prince, défendue par un ancien proche d’Hillary D. Rodham Clinton, je vous le rappelle) « obtient » (sic) la sécurité de la présidence libyenne. Un fromage, disons de 250 M$US ! Miracle ! Le pseudo État libyen verra aussitôt une somme, peu ou prou équivalente, revenir dans son escarcelle…
Secundo, à qui croyez-vous que sera confié l’économie libyenne, si ce n’est à des obligés de Washington ? Que nous encore rappelé Manlio Dinucci ? Que « La « saine gestion financière publique », que le FMI s’engage à réaliser, sera garantie par le nouveau ministre des finances et du pétrole Ali Tarhouni, ancien enseignant de la Business School de l’Université de Washington, autrement dit nommé par la Maison-Blanche »12.
Le reste, croyez-moi, c’est l’écume des jours. Et rien, d’autre…
Q – Et le terrorisme, vous n’en parlez plus ?
Jacques Borde – Pour l’instant, non. Remarquez, cependant, que, selon des estimations de la communauté du Renseignements, une bonne dizaine de millier de missiles sol/air – de type Sol/air à très courte portée (Satcp) – auraient disparu des dépôts de l’armée libyenne ! Mais, il me semble que je vous en avais déjà parlé.
Je me souviens qu’en son temps, un diplomate US blanchi sous le harnais, avait tenu, en substance, ces propos : « Vous avez aimé Beyrouth ? Vous aimerez Bagdad » ! Si vous le voulez bien, plagions-le, pour conclure : « Vous avez aimé l’Afghanistan ? Vous aimerez la Somalie de la Sarkozie » ! La Libye, je veux dire…
Notes
[1] Groupuscule d’extrême-droite, nés des décombres de l’OAS, farouchement anticommuniste et hostile à l’indépendance de l’Algérie.
[2] Bruxelles2.eu.
[3] Bruxelles2.eu.
[4] Bruxelles2.eu.
[5] Et dont les forces armées restent, statutairement en raison des liens toujours existant avec Sa Très Gracieuse Majesté britannique, « royales ».Cela vous semblera plus évident lorsque je vous citerai de cette autre spécificité canadienne : la RCMP. Autrement dit la Royal Canadian Mounted Police, dont la terminologie, en français, est Gendarmerie Royale Canadienne (GRC).
[6] Globe & Mail (21 septembre 2011).
[7] Fox News Sunday (4 septembre 2011).
[8] Karl Rove est l’ancien conseiller en chef de George W. Bush. Il dût rendre son tablier lors de l’Affaire Plame. Encore appelée Affaire Plame-Wilson. Karl Rove aurait dévoilé l’identité d’un agent de la CIA, Valerie Plame, épouse, par ailleurs, d’un ambassadeur américain, Joseph Wilson, qui avait démenti la vente d’uranium par le Niger à l’Irak, ce qui mettait en difficulté George W. Bush.
[9] Il Manifesto (13 septembre 2011).
[10] Il Manifesto (13 septembre 2011).
[11] Il Manifesto (13 septembre 2011).
[12] Il Manifesto (13 septembre 2011).

About Ginette Hess Skandrani

écologiste, membre co-fondatrice des Verts,présidente de "La Pierre et l'Olivier" réseau de solidarité avec le peuple de Palestine, co-fondatrice de la commission d'enquête non gouvernementale sur la vérité en Libye,
This entry was posted in Nouvelles. Bookmark the permalink.