The same neocon hawks who lied us into Iraq are using the ultimate argument-stopper to push war with Iran
By Gary Kamiya
November 23, 2011 “
Salon” – - We’ve been through this before. As one of the most disastrous wars in our history is coming to an inglorious end, the same neoconservative hawks who dreamed it up are agitating for a new war that would make Iraq look like the invasion of Grenada — and using the ultimate trump card in American politics to silence debate over it.
When hawks begin beating the drums for war in the Middle East, Israel is usually a big reason why. That was true in the run-up to the war in Iraq, and it is doubly true with the current hysteria over Iran. Despite disingenuous claims to the contrary, the only reason the U.S. is even talking about war with Iran is Israel. As the invaluable M.J. Rosenberg, who knows the working of the Israel lobby as only a former card-carrying member can,notes, “It is impossible to find a single politician or journalist advocating war with Iran who is not a neocon or an AIPAC cutout. (They’re often both.)”
If American politics did not contain an enormous blind spot, no one would pay any attention to what these discredited ideologues have to say. The Iraq war they championed turned out to be one of the biggest foreign-policy disasters in U.S. history. Their ignorant and Islamophobic view of the Middle East is as breathtaking as their bland willingness to commit America to yet another ruinous war against a Muslim country, this time one four times larger than Iraq and with more than twice as many people. They have a demonstrated track record of complete failure.
Yet these incompetent militarists are still taken seriously. And the reason is simple: They purport to be supporters of Israel. In American politics, you can get away with even the most cracked war-mongering as long as you claim to be “pro-Israel.” And the ultimate get-out-of-jail-free card for anything having to do with Israel is the Holocaust.
To listen to the neocons and hawks, you’d think Hitler was about to send the tanks over the Polish border. Former U.S. ambassador and Dr. Strangelove impersonator John Bolton said,“The only alternative now is the potential for a pre-emptive military strike against their military program, either by the United States or Israel. Diplomacy has failed. Sanctions have failed.” For Bolton, Iran is the second coming of Nazi Germany: “If the choice is them continuing [towards a nuclear bomb] or the use of force, I think you’re at a Hitler marching into the Rhineland point … We’re still in 1936, but not for long.”
Jeffrey Goldberg, the former Israeli Defense Forces corporal and Atlantic writer, whose bogus claim in the New Yorker that Saddam Hussein might give his nonexistent WMD to al-Qaida helped convince some liberals to support the Iraq war, claims, “The Israeli case for preemption is compelling, and has been for some time.”
Why? “The leaders of Iran are eliminationist anti-Semites; men who, for reasons of theology, view the state of the Jews as a ‘cancer.’ They have repeatedly called for Israel’s destruction and worked to hasten that end, mainly by providing material support and training to two organizations, Hamas and Hezbollah, that specialize in the slaughter of innocent Jews. Iran’s leaders are men who deny the Holocaust while promising another.”
Goldberg acknowledged the downside for Israel of attacking Iran, including international isolation and retaliation, but for him that was a reason why America, not Israel, should threaten war.
“Numerous Israeli officials have told me that they are much less likely to recommend a preemptive strike of their own if they were reasonably sure that Obama was willing to use force. And if Iran’s leaders feared there was a real chance of a U.S. attack, they might actually modify their behavior,” Goldberg wrote. “I believe Obama would use force — and that he should make that perfectly clear to the Iranians.”
Neoconservative leader Bill Kristol, who was wrong about Iraq and was rewarded by being given a gig at the New York Times, where he quickly proved to be perhaps the worst columnist of all time, wrote in the Weekly Standard, “The next speech we need to hear from the Obama administration should announce that, after 30 years, we have gone on the offensive against this murderous regime. And the speech after that can celebrate the fall of the regime, and offer American help to the democrats building a free and peaceful Iran.” In 2009, Kristol compared Obama to Neville Chamberlain for not being sufficiently outspoken on behalf of the Iranian people.
The Holocaust mind-set
But the most nakedly coercive use of the Holocaust was made by GOP presidential candidate Newt Gingrich (whose trustworthiness in foreign policy matters can be judged by the fact that he criticized the Bush State Department for not cooking its intelligence to support the Iraq war). “I don’t think the United States has the moral right to say to a country whose people who have already gone through one Holocaust – two nuclear weapons is another Holocaust,” said in 2006. “And Iran is racing to arm itself with atomic bombs.” In language virtually identical to Goldberg’s, Netanyahu said that while the Iranian president “denies the Holocaust, he is preparing another Holocaust for the Jewish state.”
“We will always remember what the Nazi Amalek did to us,” Netanyahu said at a 2010 Holocaust remembrance service at Auschwitz, “and we won’t forget to be prepared for the new Amalek, who is making an appearance on the stage of history and once again threatening to destroy the Jews.”
The Holocaust mind-set has led Israel into self-destructive policies. And its promiscuous invocation has helped ensure that Israel maintains a stranglehold over America’s Mideast policy. That stranglehold has always been harmful to America, but it is now actually dangerous.
For there is a very real possibility that Israel will attack Iran. I have been reading Israel’s best newspaper, Ha’aretz, for more than 10 years, and I have never seen a possible war with Iran taken so seriously by its journalists. Ha’aretz is a left-leaning paper, but the concern in Israel reaches across the political spectrum. Israel’s leading political columnist, Nahum Barnea, recently warned in a front-page story in Israel’s highest-circulation newspaper, the centrist Yediot Achronot, that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Secretary Ehud Barak, overriding the objections of their security experts, may launch an attack on Iran this winter.
Barnea’s article is in Hebrew: it is summarized by Larry Derfner, who writes for the excellent Israeli-American site 972. Barnea wrote, “Netanyahu [believes] Ahmadinejad is Hitler; if he is not stopped in time, there will be another Holocaust. There are those who describe Netanyahu’s attitude on the matter as an obsession: all his life he dreamed of being Churchill; Iran gives him the opportunity.”
The odds of war
To be sure, the odds are still against Israel actually launching an attack. Washington has made it clear it does not want war with Iran, and the first rule of Israeli politics is “never threaten the special relationship with America.” Israel has been warning that Iran is months away from getting a nuclear bomb for years. And it has a history of rattling its saber as a tactic to force the U.S. to take a harder line with Iran.
But the possibility that Israel might attack Iran, especially after the U.S. troops leave Iraq, cannot be taken lightly — not least because of Netanyahu’s invocation of the Holocaust. Netanyahu is apparently sincerely convinced that if Iran’s nuclear program is not destroyed, Israel will face another Holocaust. If that is true, the traditional restraints on Israeli behavior may not apply.
It is possible that Israel might attack Iran unilaterally, and dare the U.S. to stop it. As Iran analyst Mark Fitzpatrick told Reuters, “When you consider that next year being the U.S. presidential election year, and the dynamics of politics in the United States, this could increase Israel’s inclination to take matters into its own hands. The most likely possibility is that Netanyahu calls up Obama and says: ‘I’m not asking for a green light, I’m just telling you that we’ve just launched the planes, don’t shoot them down.’ And in a U.S. presidential election year, I think it’s unlikely that Obama would shoot them down.”
The Israeli historian Benny Morris makes the same point.
“Most observers in Israel believe that while Israel would like to have a green light from Washington, it will proceed without one if it believes that its existence is at stake,” he wrote in the National Interest. “The feeling here is that Obama will endorse, and perhaps in various ways assist, an Israeli strike once it is underway — whether or not he is consulted beforehand — because he sees the ayatollahs’ regime as a threat to world peace and American interests in the Middle East; because successive American administrations, including his own, have declared that Washington will not to allow Iran to acquire the bomb; and because, in a presidential election year, Obama cannot afford to alienate the Jewish vote.”
Morris’ assertion that Obama would be willing to endorse and perhaps assist an Israeli strike because he believes it is justified is extremely dubious, to put it mildly. Obama’s Middle East policies have been hugely disappointing, but he is not a fool. He knows that Iran — which has not started a war in modern history — poses no conceivable military threat to the United States. He also knows that the Arab Spring and the crisis in Syria have weakened Tehran’s geo-strategic position. There is also the little issue of America being bankrupt and its military exhausted. For all these reasons, for Washington to even consider starting a war with Iran would be utter lunacy. This is why Obama has repeatedly sent Netanyahu high-level messages, from Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and others, warning him not to launch a unilateral attack.
But starting a war is one thing, and daring to stand up to Israel in an election year is another. As usual, the discourse is tilted psychotically to the right. The GOP presidential candidates are beating up Obama for his alleged lack of support for Israel and falling over each other to be first in line to attack Iran. (Mitt Romney, who stands a decent chance of being the next president, actually said that he would simply let Israel decide America’s Mideast policy.) And considering Obama’s politically driven surrender to Netanyahu, Morris and Fitzpatrick are probably right that he would be unwilling to confront the Israeli leader.
In other words, it is quite likely that the most powerful nation in the world will simply stand impotently by while a tiny client state threatens to do something that it knows is not just antithetical to its interests, but possibly ruinous to them. The tail could be about to wag the dog right off a cliff.
If war does break out, the consequences for America would be catastrophic. Oil prices would soar, plunging the U.S. and the world into a massive depression. Iran would use its proxies to attack U.S. troops. And the entire region would erupt, with unforeseeable consequences. It is not too much of a stretch to say that war with Iran might spell the beginning of the end of America as a superpower.
Of course, if a nuclear Iran really did threaten the existence of Israel, a preemptive strike might be justified. But according to the upper echelons of Israeli’s military and security brass, Iran does not pose such a threat. Israel’s recently retired Mossad chief, Meir Dagan, called plans to attack Iran “the stupidest thing I’ve ever heard,” saying that an attack would mean a regional war that would put Israel in an “impossible” position.
Israel’s former military chief of staff, Gabe Ashkenazi, is also opposed to war, as is former Shin Beth head Yuval Diskin. Another former Mossad chief, Ephraim Halevy, said Iran poses no existential threat to Israel and attacking it “will impact the region for 100 years.”
If Iran were to launch a nuclear missile at Israel, Israel would instantly vaporize it with the estimated 200 nuclear warheads it possesses. Contrary to the ignorant claims made by Islamophobic hawks like Goldberg, Iran is not run by madmen bent on committing national suicide. (If its leaders really are “eliminationist anti-Semites,” it’s hard to understand why they have not wiped out Tehran’s Jewish community.)
In fact, the logic behind attacking Iran is identical to that of Dick Cheney’s notorious “one percent doctrine,” which held that if there was even a 1 percent chance that Iraq might acquire WMD, the U.S. had to attack. Cheney’s crackpot doctrine has been thoroughly discredited. But because the supposed 1 percent possibility is another Holocaust, it is once again framing American policy.
What a nuclear Iran really threatens, as several top Israeli officials have admitted, is Israeli hegemony in the region. The Arab Spring and the rise of Turkey have already begun to erode that hegemony, and Iran’s inevitable acquisition of the ability to build a bomb will further erode it. Israel cannot fight this trend. The days when it could impose its will by bullying are over. It must learn to live with its neighbors.
Which takes us to the one thing that is anathema to the war-mongers: full diplomatic engagement with Tehran. It is time for the U.S. to put everything on the table – Hamas, Hezbollah, Syria, the Israeli-Palestinian file, the nuclear issue, Iraq – thrash it all out, acknowledge that Iran is going to be a major regional player, and come to an agreement.
The key element is the Israeli-Palestinian issue. If Israel makes a just peace with the Palestinians and the Arab League recognizes Israel, the entire raison d’etre of Iran’s rejectionist position would be removed. Israel and Iran would then just be neighbors squabbling over their turf, along with the rest of the countries in the rapidly transforming Middle East.
Israel stands at a crossroads — and time is not on its side. Netanyahu is a disciple of the father of Revisionist Zionism, Ze’ev Jabotinsky, who argued that the Arabs, understandably in his view, would never voluntarily accept Zionist colonization, and could only be controlled by an “Iron Wall the native population cannot break through.”
Netanyahu lacks Jabotinsky’s intellectual integrity, but shares his belief that brute force is Israel’s only recourse. For him, it is always 1938, the Palestinians are terrorists, Israel’s enemies are murderous anti-Semites and the Jewish state must exist in a constant state of war.
Israel, supported by the United States, has been fighting the Nazis for 63 years. That Iron Wall approach, which sees all of Israel’s enemies as reincarnations of Hitler (as in Jeffrey Goldberg’s propagandistic assertion that Hezbollah and Hamas “specialize in the slaughter of innocent Jews”) has been a calamitous failure. It has not made Israel safer. As even center-right Israeli politicians like Tzipi Livni now recognize, it has resulted in Israel becoming increasingly isolated from the world, much of which now sees it as a pariah.
And Israel will not be given another 63 years. If it continues down this path, aided by its false “friends” in the U.S. who insist on fighting Hitler-redux to the last Israeli (and the last American), Israel is doomed. But if it abandons its self-defeating Holocaustology, it will be able to live in peace with its neighbors and join the world.
From the founding of Israel in the ashes of the Final Solution, the Holocaust has been at the core of Israel’s national identity. That identity is affirmed every year, when at 10 in the morning, sirens are sounded for two minutes throughout Israel to commemorate the Holocaust. During those two minutes, everything comes to a standstill. Even the traffic on the road stops.
It is understandable that a people who suffered one of the most horrific genocides in human history would commemorate it, and vow never to allow it to happen again. But history is filled with ugly ironies, and sometimes the reaction to a trauma ensures that it keeps happening again.
A young Polish Jew named Ruth Grunkraut and her mother were shipped to Bergen-Belsen. Grunkraut’s mother died just six days before the Allies liberated the camp. Before she died, she told her daughter, “You must live. You must live for me.”
The annals of the Holocaust are filled with this same message: You must live.
An attack on Iran will be carried out in the name of the victims of the Holocaust. But that attack, rather than saving the Jewish state, will sound the death knell for it. Israel and its American supporters owe more to the millions of human beings whose last prayer, before their deaths, was that their children live.
November 29, 1947 was the date the UN passed the Partition Resolution partitioning Palestine, more or less equally, into a Jewish and an Arab state.
In fact, the ethnic cleansing commenced the very next morning when the 75,000 Arab citizens of Haifa were subjected to a campaign of terror jointly by the terrorist group, the Irgun, under Manachem Begin, and the Haganah, the regular militia under David Ben Gurion. The Jewish settlers who had arrived during the previous decade had built their homes higher up the mountain and thus occupied a higher topographical space. From the superior height, they could snipe at the villagers at will. They began doing this while the Jewish troops rolled barrels of burning oil down their roads and then ignited them. When the terrified residents came out to try to extinguish the rivers of fire, they were sprayed with machine gun fire. Another techniques was to deliver cars filled with explosives to Arab garages to be repaired, and then to detonate the cars in the garages.
On its website, the official historian of the Palmach (a special unit of the Haganah) states, “The Palestinians [in Haifa] were from December onwards under siege and intimidation.”
This was the beginning of the ethnic cleansing and occurred six months before the first regular soldier from a surrounding Arab state entered Palestine, which was on May 15, 1948.
I remind you that the Deir Yassin massacre occurred on April 9, 1948, and also that by May 15, all of the major cities of Palestine had been cleansed of Arabs and about one half of the 750,000 to 800,000 Palestinian refugees has been ethnically cleansed.
This was the beginning of the expulsion of the Palestinians Arabs from Haifa and from Palestine. The ending for Haifa’s Arabs came on Passover evening of April 21, when the British commander, Stockwell, called four Arab community leaders in to this office to inform them that the British army would be evacuating the city and advised the Arabs that they could not be protected. As Ilan Pappe puts it:
“Previous correspondence between them and Stockwell shows that that they trusted him as the keeper of law and order in the city. The British officer now advised them that it would be better for their people to leave the city, where they and most of their families had lived and worked ever since the mid-eighteenth century, when Haifa came to prominence as a modern town. “ – (Pappe, The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine, p 94)
“[I]t was Mordechai Maklef, the operation officer of the Carmel Brigade … who called the shots. Maklef orchestrated the cleansing campaign, and the orders he issued to his troops were plain and simple: ‘Kill any Arab you encounter; torch all inflammable objects and force doors open with explosives.’
“When these orders were executed promptly within the 1.5 square kilometers where thousands of Haifa’s defenseless Palestinians were still residing , the shock and terror were such that, without packing any of their belongings or even knowing what they were doing, people began leaving en masse. In panic they headed towards the port where they hoped to find a ship or boat to take them away from the city. As soon as they had fled, Jewish troops broke into and looted their houses. …
“In the early hours of dawn on 22 April, the people began streaming to the harbor. As the streets in that part of the city were already overcrowded with people seeking escape, the Arab community’s self-appointed leadership tried to instill some order in the chaotic scene. Loudspeakers could be heard, urging the people to gather in the old marketplace next to the port, and seek shelter there until an orderly evacuation by sea could be organized. ‘the Jews had occupied Stanton road and are on their way’, the loudspeakers blared.
“The Carmeli Brigade’s war book, chronicling its action in the war, shows little compunction about what followed thereafter. The brigade’s officers, aware that people had been advised to gather near the port’s gate, ordered their men to station three-inch mortars on the mountain slopes overlooking the market and the port – where the Rothchild Hospital stands today – and to bombard the gathering crowds below. The plan was to make sure the people would have no second thoughts, and to guarantee that the flight would be in one direction only. Once the Palestinians were gathered in the marketplace – an architectural gem dating back to the Ottoman period, covered with white arched canopies, but destroyed beyond recognition after the creation of the State of Israel – they were an easy target for the Jewish marksmen.
“Haifa’s market was less than one hundred yards from what was then the main gate to the port. When the shelling began, this was the natural destination for the panic-stricken Palestinians. The crowd now broke into the port, pushing aside the policemen who guarded the gate. Scores of people stormed the boats that were moored there, and began to flee the city. We can learn what happened next from the horrifying recollections of some of the survivors, published recently. Here is one of them:
‘Men stepped on their friends and women on their own children. The boats in the port were soon filled with living cargo. The overcrowding in them was horrible. Many turned over and sank with all their passengers.’” (Pappe p 96)
Thus it was the Jews who pushed the Palestinians into the sea, and not vice versa.
In March of 1948, a month earlier than the events described above, the so-called ‘Plan D’ or ‘Plan Dalet’, as a further crystallization of Plans A, B and C, was finalized by David Ben Gurion, and those who were continually in consultation with him, and distributed to the Haganah commanders. This document was a blueprint for the destruction of Arab villages and expulsion of their residents, within the 78% of Palestine coveted by Ben Gurion, not the 55% apportioned to the Jewish state by the UN General Assembly. By this time 30 Arab villages had been either destroyed or depopulated. By the year’s end, 531 Arab villages would be destroyed, and 11 Arab neighborhoods in urban areas.
One revealing paragraph of this document states:
“These operations can be carried out in the following manner: either by destroying villages (by setting fire to them, by blowing them up, and by planting mines in their rubble), and especially those populations centers that are difficult to control permanently; or by mounting combing and control operations according to the following guidelines: encirclement of the villages, conducting a search inside them. In case of resistance, the armed forces must be wiped out and the population expelled outside the borders of the state.”
Between the time that Israel declared itself a state in May of 1948 and the summer of 2005, Israel killed 50,000 Palestinians, according to Israeli Historian Ilan Pappe, writing in Foreign Policy, in the summer of 2005. And since October of 2000, Israel has killed 6430 Palestinians, according to the web site, If American Knew. The latter figure averages to about 2 Palestinians killed per day by Israel (1.932, by my calculation.)
According to the Israeli Committee Against House Demolition, Israel has destroyed 34,000 Palestinian homes in the West Bank, and East Jerusalem since 1967, and, in the same period, about 800,000 olive and citrus trees in the west Bank and Gaza resulting in a loss to the Palestinian economy of $55 million, according to a recent estimate by the international humanitarian relief agency Oxfam. And in Israel’s winter assault on Gaza in 2009, Israel destroyed between 4 and 5,000 homes and either damaged destroyed as many as 50,000. Many Gaza families spent the winter of 2010 living in caves dug out of the rubble of their destroyed homes because the area is under siege with building material not allow to enter.
Because of the siege of Gaza, babies are frequently born with anemia because their mothers are not getting enough nutrition and because of the lack of food allowed into Gaza and because of the destruction of agricultural areas inside Gaza. The stunting of growth because of the lack of nutrition of Gaza’s children is prevalent, and I have seen this figure put at 14%.
Israel, a state which had never clearly defined its boundaries, invites Jews from all over the world to immigrate to Israel and expand it ranks, along with its boundaries into Arab lands.
One thing is certain: Israel is not the victim, as it is constantly screaming, but the victimizer.
- William James Martin taught at Louisiana State University in Baton Rouge. He may be contacted at: email@example.com
An officially-declared information war is currently being waged against Syria. An overwhelming majority of European television stations are portraying the events in Damascus as the cruel oppression of peaceful demonstrators by the Syrian army. In all reports, the key words have been “civilian deaths”, for which the West blames the Syrian authorities. The Arab League, having forgotten all principles of Arab solidarity, is ready to impose sanctions on Damascus. They are demonstrative in nature and do not seriously undermine the financial interests of Bashar al-Assad’s regime. But with its actions, the Arab League has clearly shown that it stands on the side of the opposition.
The Arab League’s decision is not only an understandable attempt to put pressure on Syria. First, it is a message to Russia and China, which had blocked a UN Security Council resolution that gave a “green light” to a military operation against Damascus. Until now, in their assessments of the Syrian situation, Russian diplomats have been citing the Arab states’ fairly low-key reaction to al-Assad’s policies and criticizing the West for its calls to the Syrian opposition not to enter into negotiations with the current president.
But the peaceful civilians, aboutwhom the European leaders are concerned, appear to be such only in political ads or the eyes of human rights activists. It is already clear that Syria has descended into a civil war.Opponents of the al-Assad regime have abandoned non-violence and are actively using weapons against the military and police forces. Clashes are taking place in the cities, which inevitably leads to civilian deaths. But the Syrian army is the only one getting the blame for the deaths, while the opposition is portrayed as “the Lambs of God” before the Western society. Syrian news agencies are trying to relay reports about the deaths of dozens of Syrian soldiers. But the Western press makes no mention of that, just as it fails to report about this so-called opposition, where behind the ardent liberals, who had long emigrated from Syria, fight various Islamic movements.
The military uses armour in order to suppress the violence. It is being used rather effectively, which raises apparent discontent in Europe. Where al-Assad’s opponents got modern weapons – is a rhetorical question. Suffice to recall how, in the midst of the Libyan conflict, the French denied that they were helping arm the rebels with disregard for the UN Security Council resolution. Only several months later, after the capture of Tripoli, it was discovered that Paris, indeed, was making the supplies through third countries. No investigation into the case has been conducted following the collapse of the Gaddafi regime.
Washington has deployed an aircraft carrier with support ships to the Mediterranean Sea. The White House denies that this step is part of preparations for military action against Syria. But the Pentagon’s operations against Iraq and Libya also began with fairly “innocent” relocations of aircraft-carriers, and ended in a traditional manner – with airstrikes on Baghdad and Tripoli.
Syria will not be able to protect itself on its own. In the event NATO launches a military operation or the Turkish army invades the country, in the best case scenario, Damascus will be able to hold out for one month.Western officials do not hide their certainty that neither Russia nor China will decide to intervene in the events in Syria, simply limiting their actions to diplomatic demarches.
But the changing global situation indicates that countries, taking predictable political steps, will always lose geopolitically.
Moscow is not expected to show active support for Syria despite the enormous investments that have been made into that country. But, perhaps time has come for Russia to make a choice – either continue observing as the Western coalition systematically disregards international law or help a country, which we have numerous times called a strategic partner – be it with weapons, advisors, or the Navy – and do so without looking at the consequences, but with a firm understanding that, in the future, there will be other times when Russia will be forced to defend its interests, and not only through diplomacy. The Libyan events have shown that the West no longer fears “major bloodshed” and, without hesitation, uses force to topple any inconvenient regime. It is also time we realize that the use for force is possible and, in certain cases, necessary to protect our allies. Russia’s successful military operation, conducted to protect civilians in South Ossetia from the Georgian army had, ultimately, raised Moscow’s prestige. It showed that its army is not a “paper tiger”, as many had believed in the West.
The situation in Syria is a new test of strength for Russia. And this is the case when we cannot “give up” Damascus.
The United States is a private corporation owned by the British Crown (Rothschild), the Bank of England (Rothschild) and the Vatican (Rothschild again).
Posted by: Colette Csezko
A lawsuit was filed on November 23rd that could end the secret government that has ruled Western civilization for at least the past 300 years. The lawsuit claims that close to $1 trillion was stolen by, among others, UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon and the UN, former Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi and the Italian government, Giancarlo Bruno and the Davos World Economic forum and others believed to include many of the owners of the US Federal Reserve Board. The lawsuit was filed in New York by Neil Keenan, acting as representative of the Dragon family, a reclusive group of wealthy Asian families. This filing is the result of extensive evidence gathering by international police and law-enforcement agencies including Interpol, the CIA, the Japanese Security Police, Eastern European secret services and has the backing of the Pentagon as well as the armed forces of Russia and China.
The ultimate defendants in this legal action are believed to be the same cabal behind the assassination of US President John F. Kennedy and many other major international crimes.
This particular lawsuit was triggered by the illegal detainment of two Japanese citizens, Akihiko Yamaguchi and Mitsuyoshi Watanabe, as well as the seizure of $134.5 billion in bonds they were holding in Italy on June 3, 2009. After the bonds were stolen, self-described 33rd degree Freemason Leo Zagami contacted this writer and said the Montecarlo P2 masonic lodge could cash the bonds with the help of Vatican banker Daniel Dal Bosco. This writer forwarded the information, via a member of the UK Royal family, to the dragon family who entrusted a further $1 trillion worth of similar bonds to the plaintiff Neil Keenan. Keenan then, after much negotiation, entrusted the bonds to Dal Bosco.
Dal Bosco subsequently absconded with the bonds and was followed 24-hours a day by various intelligence service agents to see what he would do with them. The Dal Bosco trail led to the Davos World forum, the UN, the Italian government and the Vatican, among other places. Following this, Keenan was approached by a who’s who of powerful figures including top Vatican officials, Wall Street bankers, European nobles and former US presidents, most offering him astronomical bribes to go away. He was also poisoned with ricin and nearly killed.
According to Keenan “The roots of this case go back to between 1927 and 1938, when, under arrangements made between T.V. Soong (Finance Minister of China) and Henry Morgethau, Secretary of the Treasury, The United States Government purchased some 50 million ounces of silver and leased vast amounts of gold from the Nationalist Chinese Government, known as Kuomintang. For all the treasure handed in, certificates were given to those who surrendered their precious metals.”
Many of the bonds seized by Dal Bosco are backed with the Chinese gold taken by the Federal Reserve Board during those years and never returned to its legal owners.
Other bonds seized were Kennedy bonds. These bonds were backed by gold held in trust for the people of the planet and were supposed to be used to finance the economic development of the world. Instead they have mostly been stolen and misused by members of the cabal that has seized control of the Western financial system on behalf of private interests.
The original signatory to the Kennedy bonds was former Indonesian President Soekarno. Soekarno’s heir Dr. Seno Edy Soekanto has given Keenan power of attorney to return to their rightful owners the Kennedy bonds and other property allocated to the people of the world via something known as the global collateral accounts.
The lawsuit is only the first salvo in a legal battle to restore control of the global financial system to the people and governments of the world as well as the rightful owners of historical assets that have been seized by members of the banking cartel.
Background information on the problems with the global financial system
By Neil Keenan and Keith Scott.
The entire cause of the problem.
The United States is a private corporation owned by the British Crown (Rothchilds), the Bank of England (Rothchilds) and the Vatican (Rothchilds again). It was previously called the Virginia Company until 3/9/33 when it was dissolved by Roosevelt under the Emergency Banking Act. On 5/5/33 Congress elected to dissolve the Gold Standard and Sovereign Authority of the U.S. and all of its official capacities including government offices, departments and officers. The U.S. is a corporation, not a nation. The Federal Reserve is neither Federal, nor a Reserve. It is a private counterfeiting organization run by Jewish bankers who lend the money they print out of thin air at interest while we keep on paying these criminals to fleece the People.
That technology of theft and deception that has been exported from the United States through their promotion of this fraud as the paradigm of global finance is an obscenity that has set the seeds of its own destruction.
This has been compounded by the refusal of ordinary people to realize, know and understand that it is the duplicity of Governments and the deceit and endless greed of bankers that combined to simply fleece them like the apathetic sheep they are. Apathy and ignorance of the truth, creates belief in the lie. The truth is self-evident, but most people choose to neither hear it nor understand it. The debts of the Federal Reserve are the debts of a private corporation that is robbing the people of the United States.
The United States Dollar is a Federal Reserve Note and the obligations against the currency are the obligations of the Federal Reserve, not the people of the United States.
Understanding the History
1. Between 1927 and 1938, under arrangements made between T.V.Soong (Finance Minister of China) and Henry Morgethau, Secretary of the Treasury, The United States Government purchased some 50 million ounces of silver and leased vast amounts of gold from the Nationalist Chinese Government, known as Kuomintang. During this period China was partly occupied by Japanese troops and there was the fear of China being overrun by the Japanese.
2.For all the treasure handed in, certificates were given to those who surrendered their precious metals. The surrendered precious metals and gemstones were sent to the United States under a lease agreement made between T.V. Soong and Henry Morgenthau. The Certificates became the underlying funds of the Kuomintang and were good and accepted securities.
3. In 1934 a new Securities Act was promulgated in the United States, together with the Gold Act, which required all bullion gold and gold coin to be surrendered to the Federal Reserve, a private corporation chartered to operate as the Central Bank of the United States and to be the issuer of the currency known as the United States Dollar.
4.Domestically owned gold was purchased. Foreign Gold held by the Treasury was also surrendered to the Federal Reserve, so, was leased to the Federal Reserve. This began the series 1934 Notes issued by the Federal Reserve. These have never been redeemed and the interest cost was met by further issuances of the 1934 series FRN’s.
5.These 1934 FRN’s guarantee the lease payments and to allow the Chinese Government to continue financially. These came under the control of the Kuomintang, the Nationalist Government in China from whom the Gold had been received. Many were left in China when the Kuomintang had to flee to Taiwan. The Gold had been nationalized by the Kuomintang who moved much of the FRN’s (but not all) to Taiwan which was built on these notes. These Notes were the underlying wealth of Taiwan and they were good for value as they were backed by gold.
6. During the war in China, most owners of the depository notes issued by Chinese Banks were killed by the Japanese, others later being killed by both the Kuomintang and the Chinese Communists, thus the Gold became property of the Nation, especially so, the Kuomintang. In Europe, Jews who had owned wealth were stripped of that wealth through various means and were then eliminated. The gold was taken either by stealth or by force, that is a reality of history.
7. The Kuomintang appointed guardians of this Gold and the securities issued by the United States; they are euphemistically known as the Dragon Family. The Dragon Family is in fact an organization that operates between old families within China and Taiwan, and as such is above the political divide of the two independent Chinese Governments. Chinese are remarkable in this regard, that old family ties and functions supercede political arrangements which, though they might last for generations, are regarded as inconsequential over the passage of time to most Chinese. Attached to this is the wealth of several nations. The United States in support of the Kuomintang and resistance groups actually printed more of these FRN notes inside China itself. These operations were run by the CIA to buy loyalty of various factions in the fight against the communists, eventually being driven out into Burma around 1960. Largely due to the additional printing of these notes, the additional Notes were given in lieu of interest, but directed to specific persons and parties.
8.At the end of the World War II, with Communist and Kuomintang factions at war in China, the International Community and the Chinese assented to the Gold being placed under the overt control of Indonesian President Soekarno. Soekarno then, on August 17, 1945, came to be known as M1 under United Nations Approval No. MISA 81704 “Operation Heavy Freedom. This was because much of the world’s gold had been delivered into Indonesia and the Philippines. Canada, Australia, Great Britain, India and other British Colonies sent their gold to the so called “impregnable Singapore” The Japanese, as per the arrangements agreed to by Hirohito in the 1921 Pact Between Nations made in London, delivered much of this gold to Indonesia (Then a Dutch Colony) and to Philippines (Then a US Colony) into secret bunkers that had been mostly constructed by the Japanese between 1924 and 1945. This is why the Allied troops in Malaya had no air cover or sufficient supplies to that would have allowed them to resist the Japanese. Singapore had to fall so most of the global wealth could be “lost” into a secret system that made the gold standard redundant and fiat currencies a reality.
This gold was documented into accounts through the Swiss Commercial Bank Union Bank of Switzerland, placed under protection of the Swiss Attorney General, registered through the Swiss National Bank into the Bank for International Settlements International Collateral Combined accounts and then from within the BIS, blocked to form the Institutional Parent Registration Accounts of the Federal Reserve System.
Later President Marcos of the Philippines was appointed and held the position of M1 until 1987 and then the position was transferred to Dr. Ray C. Dam, in October of 1987, under Legal Decadency to Heir RCD1087 Far East Entire with formal Power of Attorney and Assignment of Indonesian Assets signed by Sarinah Soetiwi (holder of the assets on behalf of the Nation of Indonesia as assigned by President Soekarno) in 1992, Dam’s authority later promulgated January 20, 1995. Dam proved to be impossible for the entire system to work with, (either because he refused to allow those who placed him in authority to steal, or because of his personal arrogance…. Difficult to know which is correct) and his authority over the Institutional parent registration Accounts set aside and the system reverted to the three Nations who had controlled these accounts since World war II, United States, Great Britain and France, who systematically and illegally subverted the established system since 1996.
9. From this we can see that there are two functional operations. One was ownership and Depository control by the owners of the Gold and the other a control system set in place to administer and control the Collateral Combined Accounts as an independent Arbiter. Ownership rights are held by the signatory to the Depository Accounts in Commercial Banks and Control Rights have been held by M1.
10. So it was, that the entire world supply of bullion and coinage gold was withdrawn and fiat currencies became the order of the day. However, underneath the notes and money issued by the Federal Reserve was the underlying wealth within a centralized system that Nations was intended to be used equitably, but Bankers determined they would use to raid national economies.
11. In 1963, President John F. Kennedy entered into an Agreement with President Soekarno to provide the funds to allow the United States Treasury to print its own currency, thus subverting the “right” to print the currency held by the Federal Reserve. The Agreement would have transferred some 59,000 tons of gold to underpin this currency. The problem with this was that the US domestic currency would have then been backed by gold which would have been a violation of international agreements meant to stabilize currencies. 11 days after signing this agreement, President Kennedy was assassinated. President Johnson the suspended EO11110 as issued by Kennedy and transferred the bullion to the Federal Reserve. The Green Hilton Agreement was not implemented until 1968 when Soekarno fell from office and when Global Trade made it imperative that the world have a Global Currency. As the Gold had been transferred to the US Treasury in 1968, a series of Bonds known as Kennedy Bonds were issued in order to honor the terms of the Green Hilton Agreement made between Kennedy and Soekarno, the 1968 terms of the gold delivery to the United States being different than made in 1934. When after 30 years, interest had not been paid as promised, a reissue of the bonds in an increased number were issued as commemorative notes and were accepted by the owners of the Gold, the Dragon Family.
12. From copies of Bank documents received by Neil Keenan, within the Green Hilton Memorial Agreement, the funds the amounts of gold and platinum are specified. These amounts of gold are certificated and the certificates and ledger copies with full and exact identification and recognition codes are available. These certificates are further proven by the bank reports, copies of which are now held by Neil Keenan. The truth of these instruments can be vigorously defended through documentation in our hands and further through interrogation of the Black Screens where the off ledger collateral is held, together with an interrogation of the grey and blue screens where we will find enormous fraud from the illegal use of these assets.
13. In the few documents we present with this complaint we can see that the assets have been deposited, the counter-assets created and presented to the depositors, the depositors have been cheated for over 70 years through the intentional and fraudulent failure of the Obligor to honor the Agreements.
14. In recent weeks we have come into possession of the books and records of the late President Soekarno, and all the codes and ledgers of the Global Accounts. The size of these accounts can be seen by reviewing the Collective Agreement between the Garuda Memorial Hilton Indonesia and the Green Memorial Hilton Geneva, established, structured and made operational between 1961 and final signature in 1972. Under this Agreement the assets of the international collateral combined were established and brought forward, then, within a short period of time misused to change the operating systems of banks.
15. Reviewing these books, we can now see that Banks set aside the notion of operating under the Charters they hold as banks, instead of being Banks they became like very poor casino operators and traders, selling what they do not own. The records in our possession, signed and registered by the receiving and managing commercial bank, show the underlying funds in numbers and amounts that stagger the imagination. The Green Hilton and Garuda Memorial Agreements demonstrate clearly the value of the global account system.
a)Gold and Platinum Deposits ran into millions of tons.
b)1934 series Federal Reserve System Bonds, Notes issued in 1928 , Kennedy Bonds ran into Quadrillions of US Dollars, Dragon Bonds are all recorded and acknowledged within the Green Hilton and Memorial Hilton Collective Agreements. Both Assets in the form of Bullion surrendered to the Global Accounts through the United States Government and then entrusted to a private corporation, the Federal Reserve System.
The complete text of the lawsuit can be read here. (PDF)
War on Libya , Syria & NGOs – “the humanitarian war” (facts & interview)
“The Humanitarian War” is a film about the demonization of Gaddafi in the run-up to the war in Libya. In this carefully researched documentary, Julien Teil examines the documents and interrogates the NGOs behind the campaign to oust Gaddafi, and shows the lack of evidence for the alleged war crimes that supposedly justified UN intervention. Join us for this week’s GRTV Feature Interview with documentary filmmaker Julien Teil as we discuss the lead-up to the war on Libya, and whether it can happen again in Syria.
Princess of Sirte,Attorney Aisha al Gaddafi speaks: Aisha Al Gadhaffi compared the heroism of martyr Mutassim Al Gadhaffi to Che Guevara of the Arab anti colonial world!! G.T.
Princess of Sirte, Colonel Aisha Al Gadhaffi has spoken to television channel Al-rai, urging all Libyans to follow the path of resistance and reject the new foreign imposed government on the people of Jamahiriyah. Aisha delivered a message to all martyrs of the Libyan resistance, and asked Libyans to embrace Moammar Al Gadhaffy the father of modern green Libya with glory, dignity, pride and said, do you need continue resistance even if you don’t hear my echo, voice, repeating the words of pious and the noble Libyan people’s colonel.
By Stephen Gule
Libya National Liberation Front (LLF) News:
(1) After rebels had emptied Libyan community banks out of gold backed dinar and gold bullions, they have unleashed a fiat money full of fiasco inside the country, the new currency is not acceptable in neighboring Tunisia, Algeria, Niger, Egypt, Tchad and Mali, not even acceptable in international branches of green banks and international commerce banks.
(2) Princess of Sirte, colonel Aisha Al Gadhaffi has spoken to television channel Al-rai, urging all Libyans to follow the path of resistance and reject the new foreign imposed government on the people of Jamahiriyah, Aisha delivered a message to all martyrs of the Libyan resistance, and asked Libyans to embrace Moammar Al Gadhaffy the father of modern green Libya with glory, dignity, pride and said, do you need continue resistance even if you don’t hear my echo, voice, repeating the words of pious and the noble Libyan people’s colonel.
(3) Heavy fights continue between green Southern command and Misrata rebel brigades, rebels from Misrata continued to use heavy fire power with grud missiles on populated civilian areas in an attempt to dislodge green resistance defenders at the Akaku oil basin, and Southern regional oil reserve base. Many rebel brigades continue to fight amongst each other after refusing to take orders and be answerable to NTC.
(4) Libyan tribes have insisted Saif Al Islam must not be killed, nor be given capital punishment, he must be protected. The tribes also urged prisoners must be returned to their home towns, cities and villages to serve the rest of their sentences with the exception of captive rebels that spread lawlessness and disorder.
(5) Many CIA agents have been spotted by green intelligence agents on ground in Tripoli, Libyan people believe the CIA is after the head of Saif Al Islam Gadhaffi as they have done in numerous African, South American and Asian nations to those who fought for their independence and national identity preservation.
(6) Federation of Libyan tribal meetings continue to take place in Zawiyah to debate many issues about the Libyan condition. Tribes are talking about establish a government that will arrest militias, looters, extortionists, and put them before national accredited people’s courts that accepted by all tribal parties.
(7) Green army has uncovered the mass graves of Sirte to take the exact number of those Libyans killed, who unjustifiably perish in the aggression by crusaders, international capitalist gangs to examine crimes of aggression, genocide and crimes against humanity in Sirte, the birth place of colonel Moammar Al Gadhaffi.
(8) The conference to rename Libyan international companies will take place in Algeria from December 2nd to 7th, governors of national banks and green financial institutions, and people’s board of trustees will look into the humanitarian needs of Libyan people, assess medical requirements and approve a humanitarian medical budget to help Libyans in areas controlled by rebels that are in desperate circumstances.
(9) NATO militia and mercenary convoy heading towards the oil terminal of Brega was targeted by green resistance and defenders of the homeland with IED, and the remaining vehicles set a blaze with RPG’s and anti aircraft artillery, killing all fighters in the convoy.
(10) The Touareg battalion of South Libya continued to protect national interests, Libyan people crossing to the South inland Africa, and delivered a statement of condemnation, rejection against the establish of not an acceptable government in Libya, the Touareg assured green resistance with continued support, stability and safety of military’s hidden oil refineries to provide fuel, stations to keep up with the resistance.
(11) The National Association of Green Libyan Airlines will move head quarters to Singapore, and change it’s name for security reasons to conceal the identity of Libyan airlines, transport carriers and increase more budget airlines within China, India and Brazil.
(12) Tribal Federation has appointed Mousa Ibrahim to lead the voice of resistance, Mousa has been advised by the army to keep very silent and vigilante due to heightened security challenges in Libya.
(13) Libyans are facing increased high risk of health care problems, anxiety and depression due to conditions of war, insecurity and national crisis.
(14) Federation of Libyan tribes are quarreling amongst each other for bringing NTC, and shame to the national and international stage.
(15) Aisha Al Gadhaffi compared the heroism of martyr Mutassim Al Gadhaffi to Che Guevara of the Arab anti colonial world.
The Libyan Resistance will continue with national updates when all news has been finalized and checked. Always Green, Always in tune with nature, life and Green Resistance, notorious for significance of life
Officials overseeing the no-fly zone enforced by Nato over Libya said the Sudanese move north of border had not encountered resistance from troops loyal to Col Muammar Gaddafi.
Since the February uprising against his regime, the Libyan leader’s forces have been concentrated around Tripoli, the capital; Sirte, the eastern town that is Col Gaddafi’s birthplace and Sebha, the desert outpost where the dictator grew up.
Officials said control of the town of Kufra and nearby military base granted the Sudanese a key strategic foothold between the regime and the opposition Transitional National Council (NTC) which holds the eastern seaboard and a series of rebel enclaves.
The Sudanese have not disrupted efforts to resume oil production on nearby southern oilfields.
“Our surveillance shows that they are not moving oil, so its not about money in the short term,” said one Western official. “The commercial oil companies monitoring is reporting that there has been no movement of oil out of Libya.
For the first time, Qatar reveals that it had soldiers on the ground across Libya assisting in the fight against Gaddafi’s regime, with the country to play a major role in integrating the rebels into the Libyan military
Qatar revealed for the first time on Wednesday that hundreds of its soldiers had joined Libyan rebel forces on the ground as they battled troops of veteran leader Muammar Gaddafi.
”We were among them and the numbers of Qataris on the ground were hundreds in every region,” said Qatari chief of staff Major General Hamad bin Ali Al-Atiya.
The announcement marks the first time that Qatar has acknowledged it had military boots on the ground in Libya.
Previously the gas-rich country said it had only lent the support of its air force to NATO-led operations to protect civilians during the eight-month uprising, which ended when Gaddafi was captured and killed last week.
Speaking on the sidelines of a meeting in Doha of military allies of Libya’s National Transitional Council (NTC), Atiya said the Qataris had been “running the training and communication operations.”
“Qatar had supervised the rebels’ plans because they are civilians and did not have enough military experience. We acted as the link between the rebels and NATO forces,” he said.
Libya’s interim leader Mustafa Abdel Jalil told the meeting that Qatar had been “a major partner in all the battles we fought.”
He added that the Qataris had “planned” the battles which paved the way for NTC fighters to gradually take over Gaddafi-held towns and cities.
Atiya also said that after the departure of NATO troops, a new international coalition led by Qatar would oversee “military training, collecting weapons, and integrating the rebels in newly established military institutions.”
The coalition, named as the “Friends Committee in Support if Libya” and which held its first meeting in Doha on Wednesday, is made up of 13 countries including the United States, Britain and France, said Atiya.
Abdel Jalil, meanwhile, urged NATO to continue its Libya campaign until year’s end, saying Gaddafi loyalists still posed a threat to the country.
Diplomats in Brussels said NATO had decided to delay a formal decision to end Libya air operations until Friday after the NTC’s request for an extension and a Russian demand for UN consultations.
Qatar admits sending hundreds of troops to support Libya rebels
Qatari chief-of-staff reveals extent of involvment, saying troops were responsible for training, communications and strategy
A Qatari jet fighter takes off for a mission over Libya in March. Until now, Qatar had acknowledged only that its airforce has taken part in Nato operations. Photograph: Louisa Gouliamaki/AFP/Getty Images
Qatar has admitted for the first time that it sent hundreds of troops to support the Libyan rebels who overthrew Muammar Gaddafi’s regime.
The Gulf state had previously acknowledged only that its air force took part in Nato-led attacks.
The revelation came as Qatar hosted a conference on the post-Gaddafi era that was attended by the leader of Libya‘s ruling National Transitional Council, Mustafa Abdel-Jalil, who described the Qataris as having planned the battles that paved the way for victory.
Abdel-Jalil also said he was asking Nato to extend its mission beyond the end of the month, when it had been due to end, until the end of the year. Help was needed because regime loyalists posed a threat from neighbouring countries, he said.
Gaddafi relatives and other key figures have fled to Algeria and Niger, amid speculation about the whereabouts of the deposed leader’s son Saif al-Islam.
A Libyan military official with the NTC told Reuters that Saif and the former intelligence chief Abdullah al-Senussi are proposing to hand themselves in to the international criminal court. A spokesman for the ICC, however, said it had received no confirmation of the claim.
The Associated Press meanwhile reported an adviser to Niger’s president, Mahamadou Issoufou, as saying Senussi was in their country.
It also has emerged that now the fighting is over, Qatar is to lead international efforts to train the Libyan military, collect weapons and integrate often autonomous rebel units into newly established military and security institutions – seen by the UN and western governments as the key challenge facing the NTC.
Qatar played a key role in galvanising Arab support for the UN security council resolution that mandated Nato to defend Libyan civilians in March. It also delivered weapons and ammunition on a large scale – without any clear legal basis.
There were repeated rumours about and occasional sightings of Qatari special forces in Libya during the war. Until now, however, there had been no official confirmation of actions that were not explicitly authorised by the UN.
The Qatari chief-of-staff, Major-General Hamad bin Ali al-Atiya, said: “We were among them and the numbers of Qataris on the ground were hundreds in every region. Training and communications had been in Qatari hands. Qatar … supervised the rebels’ plans because they are civilians and did not have enough military experience,” AFP quoted him as saying. “We acted as the link between the rebels and Nato forces.”
Qatar, whose gas reserves and tiny population make it one of the richest countries in the world, has long pursued an activist foreign policy, promoted by al-Jazeera, the Doha-based satellite TV channel.
But there was still surprise when it sent most of its air force to join Nato’s operation and delivered large quantities of what were described as defensive weapons but which included Milan anti-tank missiles to the rebels.
Qatari special forces are reported to have provided infantry training to Libyan fighters in the western Nafusa mountains and in eastern Libya. Qatar’s military even brought Libyan rebels back to Doha for exercises. And in the final assault on Gaddafi’s Bab al-Aziziya compound in Tripoli in late August, Qatari special forces were seen on the frontline. Qatar also gave $400m to the rebels, helped them export oil from Benghazi and set up a TV station in Doha.
Libyan gratitude is clear. The maroon and white flag of Qatar is often flown at celebrations and Algeria Square in central Tripoli has been renamed Qatar Square in honour of the country’s support in toppling Gaddafi. Some, however, express concern at the emirate’s support for Islamist elements such as the 17 February Martyrs Brigade, one of the most influential rebel formations, led by Abdel-Hakim Belhaj.
Ali Salabi, an influential Libyan Islamist cleric, lived in exile in Qatar for years before this year’s revolution. For some analysts the emir’s strategy is to support democratic forces selectively in the Arab world, partly to improve the country’s international standing while diverting attention from the Gulf, where anti-regime protests have been crushed in Bahrain and bought off in Saudi Arabia.
North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) has confirmed that some of its member countries such as Britain and France may have troops deployed to Libya.
An unnamed NATO official admitted that Britain and France have deployed ground troops inside the Libyan territory, but said it would be “unfair to call them NATO forces.”
Meanwhile, the Russian ambassador to NATO, Dmitry Rogozin, said there is “direct evidence” that British and French Special Forces were carrying out ground operations in Libya in violation of UN Security Council resolution 1973.
The resolution, passed in March, authorized a no-fly zone over Libya to protect civilians.
NATO spokeswoman Oana Lungescu said last week the alliance had no troops on the ground in Libya, and would not have any after the regime fell.
“The leading role in the post-Gaddafi period in supporting the Libyan people rests with the United Nations and the Contact Group. NATO will be in a supporting role… NATO will have no troops on the ground,” Lungescu told reporters in Brussels.
British Defense Secretary Liam Fox told Sky News last week that the [revolutionary forces] were getting intelligence and reconnaissance assistance from NATO.
Last week, Britain’s Daily Telegraph newspaper claimed that Britain’s elite Special Air Service regiment (SAS) were helping the [revolutionary forces] hunt down Col Muammar Gaddafi, whose forces have lost control of most of the country including the capital Tripoli.
Gaddafi’s whereabouts remain unknown, though the transitional government says he is still in hiding in Tripoli.
The [revolutionary forces], who seized Tripoli a week ago, have offered a USD1.3 million reward and amnesty from prosecution for anyone who kills or captures Gaddafi.
Libya conflict: British and French soldiers help rebels prepare Sirte attack
Soldiers on ground in eastern Libya have guided bombers to create path for opposition fighters towards Gaddafi’s birthplace
Libyan rebel fighters rest outside a mosque as they prepare to advance on Sirte. Photograph: Gianluigi Guercia/AFP/Getty Images
British and French special forces are on the ground in eastern Libya, calling in air strikes and helping rebel units as they prepare to assault Sirte, the last coastal town still in the hands of pro-Gaddafi forces, a rebel officer has told the Guardian.
The soldiers have taken a leading role not only in guiding bombers to blast a path for opposition fighters but also in planning the offensive that finally broke the six-month siege of Misrata, Mohammed Subka, a communications specialist in the Al Watum (My Home) brigade, said.
On Thursday afternoon, Subka and his unit waited at the rebel frontline, known as Kilometre Sixty, aboard a column of battered, black pickup trucks mounted with heavy machine guns and a few tanks recently captured from Gaddafi’s forces.
“We are with the England team,” he told the Guardian. “They advise us.”
Kilometre Sixty lies in the flat, empty desert, no more than a sand-coloured mosque and a wrecked diner at a traffic intersection. Sirte, Gaddafi’s birthplace, lies 80 miles away.
The advance on the city could not begin until loyalist units south of the road ahead were cleared from their positions, Subka said, flipping open his laptop to show a map – apparently provided by Nato – of artillery positions threatening the route. “We don’t worry about those units – they are Nato’s concern,” he said.
There were reports last night from a pro-Gaddafi TV station, al-Orouba, that Sirte was being bombed in air strikes but gave no further details or source.
Defence sources have confirmed to the Guardian that British special forces have been on the ground in Libya for several weeks, along with special forces from Qatar, France and some eastern European states.
Subka said British and French units had been operating in Misrata for several weeks, based somewhere near the city’s port, Kasa Ahmed. Of the two, he said the British were the more friendly.
A common complaint among Misrata commanders earlier in the conflict was that Nato had no ready way to answer requests for air support when lightly-equipped forces were attacked by tanks and heavy artillery.
Subka, who was given the job of liaising with the British unit because he once worked as an aircraft dispatcher at Tripoli airport, said that had now changed.
The alliance has provided sophisticated means of sending in requests for air strikes: “Sometimes email, sometimes VHF [radio],” he said. “You send it [the air strike request] to Misrata port.”
The Nato team also helped plan the first breakout of the rebels two weeks ago when they captured the town of Tawarga.
The plan demanded close co-ordination between the Halbus Brigade, making a frontal assault on the town, and a secondary thrust through the desert to cut Tawarga off from loyalist reinforcements.
Subka said the plan worked flawlessly. “It was a very beautiful plan,” he added. “The plan went to perfection, and not just the plan, also the timing. Even the Nato operations room sent us a commendation.”
The British and French units also helped opposition fighters assault Zlitan at the weekend in the first stage of the offensive that took rebel units into Tripoli.
Testimony to the deadly effect of Nato’s bombing was evident along the highway leading out of the city.
Concrete buildings used as bunkers by Gaddafi’s forces were flattened, while tanks were ripped apart, their turrets and tracks strewn across the road. Further south, all that remained of an ammunition truck was a blackened carpet of splinters.
Opposition commanders would rather avoid an attack on Sirte, hoping the fall of Tripoli will persuade its defenders to lay down their arms without a fight.
But a spate of attacks from Sirte on Misrata using scud missiles – the heaviest weapon in Gaddafi’s armoury – have added urgency to their advance.
At least four of the rockets have been intercepted seconds before they were due to impact on the city, reportedly hit by missiles fired by a US navy cruiser operating in the Gulf of Sirte.
Misratans, after six months of near-constant bombardment, fear that, sooner or later, one scud will get through, and the attacks have provoked the one source of tension between Nato and its rebel liaison officers.
Subka said he watched a scud come down in the sea near Misrata and called Nato to complain that it had not been intercepted. “They told me: ‘We intercepted them,’” he said. “I said: ‘You did this underwater?”
Subka insisted the working relationship with the British team was good, and their advice was again being sought as the rebels of Misrata, closing on Sirte from the west, co-ordinate with separate rebel forces from Brega moving in from the east.
Looking out across the empty desert, the weary-looking fighter said he wanted the war to end so he could train to be a pilot and spend time riding his motorbike. “We are fighting every day for six months, I’m tired of war,” he said. “I don’t want to kill anyone.”
Then he announced that it was time to go, boarded his jeep, and the long column snaked its way towards Sirte.
Cloak and dagger Low-key role of SAS
British special forces soldiers in Libya currently number fewer than 30, but the size of the deployment could be increased if the security situation deteriorates and the hunt for Gaddafi and his entourage drags on.
SAS troops have so far taken an undercover role, training rebel groups in advance of the attack on Tripoli. They have been working with French commandos and special forces from a number of east European countries. British defence officials, perhaps for political reasons, are emphasising the role played by Qatari special forces, notably in the storming of Gaddafi’s compound, and those of the UAE.
SAS soldiers, whose role in Libya was first reported in the Guardian, have long experience of hunting down prominent individuals, a task they carried out in Bosnia in the search for war criminals, in Iraq, where they tracked down leading al-Qaida operatives, and in Afghanistan, where US generals praised their role in killing Taliban commanders.
However, in Libya their primary task is likely to remain that of advisers, UK defence officials said. Their presence in any final shoot-out with Gaddafi would not be welcome, either in Libya or in London, officials suggest. Richard Norton-Taylor
Statements of support for Libya’s revolution by al-Qaeda and leading Islamists have led to fears that military action by the West might be playing into the hands of its ideological enemies.
A Libyan rebel grimaces on the frontline near Sultan, south of Benghazi Photo: AP
WikiLeaks cables, independent analysts and reporters have all identified supporters of Islamist causes among the opposition to Col Gaddafi’s regime, particularly in the towns of Benghazi and Dernah.
An al-Qaeda leader of Libyan origin, Abu Yahya al-Libi, released a statement backing the insurrection a week ago, while Yusuf Qaradawi, the Qatar-based, Muslim Brotherhood-linked theologian issued a fatwa authorising Col Gaddafi’s military entourage to assassinate him.
But they also agree that the leading roles in the revolution are played by a similar cross-section of society as that in Egypt next door – liberals, nationalists, those with personal experience of regime brutality and Islamists who subscribe to democratic principles.
The WikiLeaks cables, initially revealed by The Daily Telegraph and dating from 2008, identified Dernah in particular as a breeding ground for fighters in a number of causes, including Afghanistan and Iraq.
“The unemployed, disfranchised young men of eastern Libya have nothing to lose and are therefore willing to sacrifice themselves for something greater than themselves by engaging in extremism in the name of religion,” the cables quoted a Dernah businessman as saying.
REPORT: HUNDREDS OF LIBYAN JIHADISTS RELEASED FROM JAIL
What would happen to the new Libya of hundreds of hardcore Jihadists were released from prison there?
We may soon find out the answer if a new report from CNN is true. It includes analysis from Noam Benotman, a former Libyan Islamic Fighting Group Member who renounced violence and joined the Quilliam Foundation, an counter-radicalization group based in the UK. According to Benotman:
“The freed militants had been imprisoned in Tripoli‘s Abu Salim prison by Moammar Gadhafi’s regime during the height of the insurgency in Iraq… as many as 600 militants may have been among the prison population at Abu Salim.”
In an even more distressing admission, Benotman also told CNN that many of the militants released are pro-al Qaeda and could infiltrate and perhaps control elements of the rebel forces, or start their own militant factions. He continued his analysis with this question:
“Nobody knows what these released prisoners are going to do next…will they take part in the fighting and if they do will they join pre-existing rebel brigades or form a separate fighting force?”
CNN’s terrorism analyst, Paul Cruikshank, gave his analysis of the Libyan Jihadist jail break here:
Libya has a long been known as a hotbed of the international Jihad. A study by the Combatting Terrorism Center at West Point indicated that a disproportionately large number of young men from Libya entered Iraq to wage Jihad during the height of that conflict.
Beyond that, the CTC study noted that the East of Libya– the area from which the anti-Gadhafi rebels originate– has been the region most associated with Islamic radicalism in the country. On this point, the author, Alison Pargeter, wrote:
“Eastern Libya has traditionally been the primary center of the country’s Islamist opposition currents and where cells of young Islamist militants are located. It is also where scores of young Libyan men left to join the jihad in Iraq. Given that the regime is still struggling for survival and that Libya looks unlikely to return to any sort of normality soon, the issue of Islamism in a future Libyan scenario cannot be dismissed.”
The release of hundreds of prisoners– many of whom apparently have Jihadist backgrounds– should concern anyone who still believes a peaceful, democratic Libya can form.
But as we continue to struggle with the war in Afghanistan– where the official estimate of Al Qaeda members was under 100 in 2009– the possibility that 600 Jihadists have been released in Libya at this critical time could be an urgent matter for the future of that country.
A former inmate at the notorious Guantanamo Bay prison who was considered a “probable” member of al Qaeda and a “medium-to-high risk” is now among the leadership of the U.S.-backed Libyan rebellion aiming to depose dictator Moammar Gadhafi, according to leaked documents cited in mediareports.
The former prisoner turned American ally, known as Abu Sufian Ibrahim Ahmed Hamuda bin Qumu, was captured in Pakistan after the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan. He was then sent to Guantanamo Bay, where, according to classified documents released by WikiLeaks, U.S. analysts determined in 2005 that he was a “former member of the [al Qaeda-linked] Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG), [a] probable member of al Qaeda and a member of the North African Extremist Network.”
In addition to admittedly working for al Qaeda front groups in Afghanistan, bin Qumu “has a long-term association with Islamic extremist jihad and members of al-Qaeda and other extremist groups,” the document explained. During his time working for an al Qaeda organization in Kabul, bin Qumu “used his employment … as a front for extremist activities.” Also, while in Pakistan’s tribal region, bin Qumu “communicated with likely extremist element[s] in Afghanistan via radio …, indicating a position of leadership.”
Citing intelligence obtained from the Libyan regime when it was still a U.S. ally several years ago, the secret report said bin Qumu was considered a “dangerous man with no qualms about committing terrorist acts.” The document also said the prisoner was known as one of the “extremist commanders of the Afghan Arabs,” referring to jihadists in Afghanistan who were funded, armed, and trained by the U.S. government before apparently turning against it.
But even though American officials believed bin Qumu represented a “medium-to-high risk” and that “he is likely to pose a threat to the U.S., its interests and allies,” he was sent to Libya in 2007 following six years in Guantanamo. The next year, he was set free under an amnesty program.
Now, a 51-year-old bin Qumu — with U.S. and international military support — is reportedly leading a band of anti-Gadhafi rebels known as the “Darnah Brigade.” He had promised to do an interview with theNew York Times last week but never showed up, according to the paper.
“The former enemy and prisoner of the United States is now an ally of sorts, a remarkable turnabout resulting from shifting American policies rather than any obvious change in Mr. Qumu,” the Timeswrotein a piece about the jihadist.
Prior to being sent to Guantanamo, bin Qumu already had a long, documented history of problems with the law. According to the leaked report, he was sentenced to 10 years in a Libyan prison for “murder, physical assault, armed assault and distributing narcotics” after serving in the Gadhafi regime’s military.
He eventually escaped from the Libyan prison in 1993 and fled through Egypt to Afghanistan. There, he trained in at least two al Qaeda terror camps, according to news reports.
The U.K. Telegraph reported that bin Qumu eventually moved to Sudan, where he went to work for a company owned by al Qaeda boss Osama bin Laden. Finally he returned to the Afganistan-Pakistan region to help in the battle against U.S. forces before being captured by Pakistani police and shipped to Guantanamo.
Another former Guantanamo detainee who was arrested fighting U.S. forces in Afghanistan, Abdul-Hakim al-Hasidi, is also a prominent leader in the Libyan rebellion. In an interview with an Italian newspaper, headmitted that many of his fighters had been battling American troops in Iraq not long ago. He even praised al Qaeda, a group of Islamic terrorists originally supported by the U.S. government, calling them “good Muslims” who were “fighting against the invader.”
Al-Hasidi’s organization, the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG), represents the second largest contingent of foreign fighters in Iraq currently battling U.S. and coalition forces. And according to the U.S. government, the LIFG officially merged with al Qaeda in 2007.
The Libyan group is still on the U.S. State Department’s terror list. And prominent American officials including then-CIA boss George Tenet have warned that organizations such as LIFG represent “one of the most immediate threats” to U.S. security. But after the U.S. government provided air support, weapons, and money for the Libyan rebellion, al-Hasidi said his fighters don’t hate America quite as much anymore.
“Our view is starting to change of the U.S.,” he told the Wall Street Journal earlier this month. “If we hated the Americans 100 percent, today it is less than 50 percent. They have started to redeem themselves for their past mistakes by helping us to preserve the blood of our children.” It is unclear whether a 50-percent level of hatred would still justify attacks against Americans using the weapons the U.S. government is providing.
As The New Americanreported and U.S. officials have since acknowledged, numerous leading figures in the rebellion are known to be affiliated with terror groups including al Qaeda and related organizations. Some are apparently well connected to the international establishment too, according to analysts commenting on the rebels’ seemingly strange decision to create a central bank amidst the revolutionary chaos.
Meanwhile, U.S. Senator John McCain just visited the rebels in Libya and said the American government should immediately step up its efforts to aid the anti-Gadhafi cause. He claimed that failure to do so could lead to a stalemate.
“And if you’re worried about al-Qaeda entering into this fight, nothing would bring al-Qaeda in more rapidly and more dangerously than a stalemate,” McCain told NBC’s Meet the Press. Ironically, this is the same U.S. Senator who, according to another leaked document, visited the Gadhafi regime in 2009 and “assured [Gadhafi’s son] Mutassim that the United States wanted to provide Libya with the [military] equipment it needs for its security.” Of course, that was two years ago, when, according to Sen. Joe Lieberman, Libya was still “an important [U.S.] ally in the war on terrorism.”
More than anything else, however, critics charge that the unconstitutional U.S. attack against Libyaillustrates the absurdity of America’s current foreign policy. By supporting dictators and terrorists across the globe — and later turning against some of them — the U.S. government has created a fiasco of unimaginable proportions.
Photo: Libyan rebels atop the vehicle of General Abdel-Fattah Younis, the former interior minister in the Gadhafi regime who defected and who paid a visit to the front line near Brega, Libya: AP Images
The black flag of Al Qaeda was hoisted in Libya yesterday as Nato formally ended its military campaign.
The standard fluttered from the roof of the courthouse in Benghazi, where the country’s new rulers have imposed sharia law since seizing power.
Seen as the seat of the revolution, the judicial building was used by rebel forces to establish their provisional government and media centre.
Change of regime? A trademark Al Qaeda flag was seen flying over Benghazi’s courthouse last week
Flying high: The Al Qaeda flag, with Arabic writing and a moon design, can be seen flying alongside a Libyan national flag above Benghazi’s courthouse
The flag has been spotted on the courthouse several times, prompting denials from the National Transitional Council that it was responsible.
Complete with Arabic script declaring ‘there is no God but Allah’ and a full moon underneath, it was hoisted alongside the Libyan national flag.
Extremists have been seen on Benghazi’s streets at night, waving the Al Qaeda flag and shouting ‘Islamiya, Islamiya! No East, nor West, VICE reported.
A sudden lurch toward extremism will alarm many in the West who supported the ousting of Colonel Gaddafi.
It also threatens to embarrass David Cameron who staked his personal reputation on the campaign to free Libya from the tyrant. Nato stuck to its decision to end its seven-month operation despite calls from the National Transitional Council for it to stay longer.
Allies of Nato have been keen to see a quick conclusion to a costly effort that has involved 26,000 air sorties and round-the-clock naval patrols.
The UN Security Council authorised the mission in March to protect civilians in the civil war.
Nato staff temporarily seconded to the headquarters in Naples for the Libyan operation are being reassigned to their regular duties, officials said.
Last week, the country’s interim leader, Mustafa Abdul-Jalil, declared that sharia will be the ‘basic source’ of legislation.
The chairman of the National Transitional Council has also declared the country’s future parliament will have an ‘Islamist tint’.
Sharia law is a form of hardline Islamic rule favoured by fundamentalist groups such as the Taliban in Afghanistan.
Mr Abdul-Jalil has been at pains to insist ‘that we as Libyans are moderate Muslims’, and has said the proposed constitution is ‘temporary’ and will be put to a referendum.
But he has given a speech in which he said any law that ‘violates sharia’ is ‘null and void’.
This means Libyan men will be free to take more than one wife, a policy branded a ‘disaster for women’ by Adelrahman al-Shatr, a founder of the newly-formed centre-right Party of National Solidarity.
He said: ‘By abolishing the marriage law, women lose the right to keep the family home if they divorce. It is a disaster for Libyan women.
The Al-Qaeda flag was seen above Benghazi’s courthouse just days after Libyan rebels imposed Sharia law on parts of the country (file picture)
‘It is a subject that should be discussed with the different political groups and with the Libyan people. These declarations create feelings of pain and bitterness among women.’
A spokesman for a group called Women Living Under Muslim Laws said: ‘Women are directly targeted by this change in laws and will lose many acquired rights in the process.’
The Benghazi courthouse was the epicentre of the revolution and on its forecourt in February running battles were fought with Gaddafi’s mercenaries in the first few days of the uprising.
After Benghazi fell to the rebels, the courthouse became the headquarters of the fledgling leadership. They barricaded the main doors with wooden logs and set up a rudimentary government on the first floor, from where they worked tirelessly to organise the rest of the eight-month revolution.
To this day, captured tanks parked outside the courthouse are a playground for children and a symbol of the people’s defeat of the tyrant.
Success: Nato has destroyed around 5,900 military targets since it began operations in Libya seven months ago
NATO’S LIBYA CAMPAIGN
Mar 17: U.N Security Council passes a resolution to impose a no-fly zone in Libyan airspace.
Mar 19: French and Italian aircraft enter Libyan airspace to begin reconnaissance and surveillance. British and U.S. ships and submarines fire Tomahawk cruise missiles at Libyan air and ground defences.
Naval blockade also enforced.
May 11: Nato aircraft fires four rockets at Gaddafi’s compound in Tripoli, killing two people.
May 12: 52 NATO strikes are carried out against loyalist targets across the country.
May 26: In the strongest attack of the operation so far, Nato planes bomb 20 targets in Tripoli under 30 minutes.
June 13: Nato carries out 62 airstrikes against targets in Tripoli and four other cities.
June 20: Nato is accused of killing 19 civilians in Sorman, west Tripoli, following another attack
July 16: Another Nato strike kills 10 rebels and wounds 172 during an advance on Brega.
Aug 9: Nato bombs a warship in Tripoli harbour.
Aug 20: Nato-supported rebels in Tripoli launch an uprising in the city, as Nato launch bombing raids over government targets.
Oct 20: Rebel forces take Sirte, with Gaddafi captured and eventually killed as Nato planes attack his convoy.
Oct 23: Gaddafi’s family are forced to flee as rebels claim his compound in Bab al-Azizia.
Oct 31: Nato ends operations in Libya
A NATO airstrike in a working class suburb of Tripoli early on Sunday morning killed and injured a number of civilians. Western journalists, who have treated previous evidence of Libyan civilian casualties dismissively, were taken to the site and confirmed seeing at least five bodies, including those of a nine-month-old baby and a child. Libyan officials reported that at least four more people had been killed and another 18 injured.
The New York Times reported: “There were no indications of any military facility in the area. Children’s shoes, diapers, a woman’s dress and kitchen tools lay amid the wreckage early Sunday. The blast knocked the top off the structure, leaving a concrete staircase reaching into the air. Several carports on the block collapsed, crushing the vehicles within. A neighbour a block away invited reporters into his home to show shattered glass from windows and doors, and said his wife had been taken to the hospital with wounds from the shards.”
According to the Los Angeles Times: “Scores of people in pyjamas and sandals gathered on the rubble strewn street well into the early morning hours. Volunteers carted out chunks of concrete as they searched for survivors or the deceased. The body of a woman was found and taken away on a stretcher as the search continued. Bulldozers moved huge pieces of concrete and twisted wire. Children’s clothing was seen in the rubble.”
One man, who had no political sympathy for the Libyan regime, told the newspaper: “This is a purely civilian street. I think the sooner [Libyan leader Muammar] Gaddafi goes the better. But for NATO to bomb a street like this is criminal. There is no military here anywhere.” The house was home to members of an extended family named al-Ghrari in a working class suburb in the Souq al-Juma area of the capital.
NATO spokesmen have acknowledged only that its warplanes might have hit a civilian area. “We take all reports of civilian casualties very seriously and we will continue to look into the facts of this event,” a statement declared late Sunday. While regretting any loss of civilian life, Lieutenant General Charles Bouchard, commander in chief of the NATO mission, blamed a possible “weapons system failure.”
Likewise, the Western media played down the significance of the deaths, declaring the raid to be the first to have claimed civilian lives. It is inconceivable, however, that this was the only NATO strike out of more than 11,000 to have killed Libyan civilians.
The previous day, a NATO airstrike hit a column of tanks and military vehicles belonging to anti-Gaddafi forces as it was moving toward the front near the eastern oil city of Brega. At least 30 fighters were killed and many more injured. At least two other “friendly fire” incidents have taken place in recent weeks.
If NATO is bombing its own Libyan allies, it is certainly making similar “mistakes” in attacking the heavily-populated Libyan capital of Tripoli, where anything connected to the Libyan military is considered a target, regardless of its location. The criminal character of the bombing campaign is underscored by the repeated attacks on Gaddafi family residences in an attempt to assassinate the Libyan leader and his relatives.
The Libyan government has put the number of civilians killed in air raids at more than 800. It recently claimed that a NATO bomb destroyed a hotel and another struck a bus southwest of Tripoli, killing a dozen people. Just as similar reports of civilian deaths in Afghanistan and Iraq were routinely ignored by the US, so NATO, supported by the Western media, has dismissed previous Libyan accounts as “government propaganda.”
Libyan spokesmen were quick to point to the absurdity of NATO claims to be protecting civilians through its nearly four month-long aerial campaign. Speaking to journalists at the site of the latest bombing, deputy foreign minister Khalid Kaim said: “We have seen who is attacking civilians. They are targeting houses and flats. Tomorrow they will target schools and hospitals.”
The war on Libya is not being waged to defend civilians, but is a neo-colonial operation to further the strategic and economic aims of the US and its European allies in North Africa and the Middle East. Its objective is to remove Gaddafi and install a pro-Western puppet regime that will allow the imperialist powers to exploit the country’s energy reserves and provide a base for suppressing revolutionary movements throughout the region.
The venal character of the various bourgeois regimes in the Middle East and Africa was on display at a summit over the weekend in Cairo attended by representatives of the UN, African Union (AU), Arab League and Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OCI) to find a “political solution” to the conflict.
All these organisations are colluding with the NATO allies to fashion a pro-Western regime in Libya, out of the dubious collection of ex-Gaddafi ministers, Islamist leaders and exile figures that form the self-appointed Transitional National Council (NTC), as well as elements of the Libyan government. The cynicism of all those present was summed up in the remarks of UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon who expressed “strong concerns” about the worsening humanitarian crisis in Libya, while supporting the bombing campaign that is creating these conditions.
Each one of these organisations and the governments they represent bear responsibility for the crimes being carried out by the US and its allies in Libya.
So far from NTC side there are only forgein armies and special forces and Al Qaeda criminals. But if main stream media is calling this a „civil war” – where are that civil part? Exactly! The other side – the people of Libya – the Green resistance – Jamahiriya.
Black Libyans make their stand in Sirte and Bani Walid
A Black Agenda Radio commentary by Glen Ford
“Black soldiers are fighting for survival against the world’s biggest lynch mob, armed to the teeth by the United States and Europe.” When it comes to Blacks – whether Libyans or immigrant workers – NATO-backed rebels have shown no respect for the rules of war, or for women and children. If surrender means torture and debasement or summary execution at the hands of racist killers, the only option is a battle to the bitter end. The Black defenders of Sirte and Bani Walid fight like lions because they have no choice.
Both NATO and their Libyan rebel surrogates express wonder at the fact that loyalist forces continue to fight so fiercely in the contested cities of Sirte and Bani Walid, despite being vastly outnumbered on the ground and unceasingly pummeled from above by the world’s largest air armada. But one look at a picture of Gaddafi loyalist prisoners, captured at a hospital in Sirte, tells the story: they are all Black. The assault on Libya has largely devolved into a race war, and the Black soldiers are fighting for survival against the world’s biggest lynch mob, armed to the teeth by the United States and Europe.
Libya Day of Protest while War Spreads into Tunisia and Algeria
Dr. Christof Lehmann Oct 14 nsnbc Muammar Ghadafi – Calling Libyans to Protest against NATO and NTC today.
In his most recent address to the Libyan People, Muammar Ghadafi encouraged Libyans to protest NATO´s aggression and the NTC. For today, Friday, the Legitimate Libyan Government has called for nation wide demonstrations. Throughout the day and night there was heavy fighting in several Libyan Cities. Since nsnbc´s report on 3 October that Algerian Tribes are entering the war for Libyan Liberation, the most recent developments support that the war on Libya is spreading to Algeria and Tunisia. The world is waiting in anticipation of todays events.
3. October nsnbc reported that French Ambassador to Algeria Xavier Driencourt made preparations for an emergency evacuation of the French Embassy, and that Algerian Tribes were entering the war for Libyan war. Tonight nsnbc received confirmed reports that there had been heavy clashes in the border region between Tunisia and Libya. As Tripoli becomes increasingly unstable and the campaign against Sirte is stalling one time after the other, Tunisia has gained logistical importance for resupplying NTC fighters and material for the Sirte Offensive.
The response of Tunisian tribes was to increase their amount of attacks on NTC and NATO convoys headed for the Libyan border. Again last night, two convoys were intercepted, and the NTC fighters attacked and forced to return. TNC fighters in Tunisia, heading for Zuwaiya, terrorized a Tunisian village, took down and burned a Tunisian Flag, which resulted in the population taking up arms against the NTC fighters, killing a dozen of them, while some escaped. Several analysts with knowledge about Tunisian and Tribal matters reported to nsnbc, that last nights events are bound to increase militarized responses to NTC presence in Tunisia.
[CIA's] Al Qaeda leader Ayman Al-Zawahiri has yesterday called on Al Qaeda to widen the Libyan war, and to attack the Algerian Government.
Update on the struggle for the liberation of Libya and the unification of Africa
The NTC rebels destroyed and looted both the embassies of Syria and Algeria. The NTC rebels have recognized the NTC councils for both Syria and Algeria. Al-Qaeda leader Zawahiri congratulated the NTC and has called for a war on Algeria. Many of his followers in the NTC are following suit. The recent policy change on Algeria is a clear indication of continued conflict there.
The Tuareg tribe of Mali declared its support for the Jamahiriya government and the Green Flag, and they will send a large force to Libya. Many volunteers around the Muslim and Arab world have arrived in Libya to fight the NTC and rebels and NATO. The war of Libya has escalated into a regional war with wider implications.
/Full report, Dennis South highlights some of the output on various blogs around the web. http://pub.mathaba.net/2011/10/15/update-on-the-struggle-for-the-liberation-of-libya-and-the-unification-of-africa-october-14th-2011/
Via Twitter, am Oct 15 NTC running away, saving their butts. Hafeez Goukh fled to Qatar. NTC running away, saving their butts. Ali Altarhuni in Belgium under pretext of co-operation $ agreements NTC running away, saving their butts. Aldgala fled to Alexandria under pretext of meeting military officials NTC running away, saving their butts. Hifter ran away to Italy
Qatar favoured Al Qaeda affiliate, listed terrorist org. LIFG leader and insurgents’ Tripoli military commander Belhaj has been missing for several days. Speculation is that he’s done a runner or has been killed.
US ambassador is missing, speculated to be dead.
Arrival of rebel Misrata and Zenten Turkey to attack Syria
Posted on 28/11/2011 at 23:58
ALGERIA ISP / Misrata According to Hora (Pro NTC), an informed source, the arrival of the first group of rebels Misrata Zenten and Turkey to the entry into Syria. Abdelhakim Belhadj was charged in coordination with Turkey for the transfer of funds to the rebels.
Libya – Delta Airlines to Tripoli
Posted on 28/11/2011 at 23:57
ALGERIA ISP / Now In Libya (Pro NTC), Delta Airlines of the United States said it plans to open a direct line between Atlanta and Tripoli from next March.ISP / Now In Libya (Pro NTC), Delta Airlines of the United States said it plans to open a direct line between Atlanta and Tripoli from next March.
An armed group attacked the border crossing Raes Ajdir
Posted on 27/11/2011 at 00:17
ALGERIA ISP / Zengtena In the past few hours, an armed group attacked with small arms and anti-aircraft weapons border crossing Raes Ajdir which led to the closure of borders.ISP / Zengtena In the past few hours, an armed group attacked with small arms and anti-aircraft weapons border crossing Raes Ajdir which led to the closure of borders.
Libyan journalist kadrouya Ala Mostafa EL RAI TV
Posted on 27/11/2011 at 00:07
ALGERIA ISP / Elmokawama According to Akhbar Libya, Libyan journalist for the Libyan television Mostapha kadrouya contacted by phone Syrian TV El Rai, he confirmed his refusal to reconciliation of Libya with the rebels.
How do you want to make peace with those who killed thousands of people.
‘Proud of my role’: Teen sniper’s view of Libya conflict
Mohammed Abdul Hamid, 19, one of many who picked up a gun for the first time to kill his brothers, sisters, mothers, uncles, fathers, cousins and relatives of his own kind because they supported Qaddafi. Can someone explain to me what a 19-year-old boy knows of guns and becoming a sniper against his own fellow people getting paid for these mass murders and accepting the foreigners by thanking them that they have colonized Libya AGAIN?
“I was a sniper and I killed a lot,” he admits. ”I did many things, and I’m very happy that I did,” says Mohammed – as he stands in the remains of a vegetable market.
I picked this article from guess what one of the best media news which is very democratic really they do not pick on sides but when they interview a Pro Qaddafi it will be only one person against four or five anti Qaddafi on the interview the ratio is wrong but its democratic!!!!!! This is the Democracy BBC is offering!
Instead of being impartial and doing their job not their government’s job in selling a war and not reporting the truth but reporting the truth they (BBC, CNN, Al Jazeera, FOX, CBS etc) want to sell you! So please go ahead and go to the link and listen to the lies they are spreading to justify their actions for bombing Libya to Stone age, so that they can make new contracts and rebuilt Libya collect all our resources for free!
SHAME ON YOU JOURNALISTS YOU HAVE SOLD YOUR SOULS FOR A FEW DOLLARS MORE TO MAKE YOUR LIFE MORE COMFORTABLE AND DO YOUR GOVERNMENTS BIDDING!
SHAME ON YOU JOURNALISTS THAT YOU DO NOT HAVE THE INTEGRITY TO WRITE THE TRUTH!
ITS A SHAME THAT MOST OF YOU JOURNALISTS HAVE BECOME THE BIGGEST WHORES WORKING FOR THE HIGHEST BIDDER, I WONDER HOW YOU SLEEP AT NIGHT KNOWING THAT YOU HAVE BROUGHT DISASTER, TERROR, DEATH, TORTURE BY REPORTING WHO IS PRO QADDAFI AND WHO IS NOT.
SHAME ON YOU JOURNALISTS IN NOT REPORTING WHAT NATO DID!
SHAME ON YOU JOURNALISTS IN NOT REPORTING ALL THE WAR CRIMES NATO DID.
SHAME ON YOU JOURNALISTS IN NOT REPORTING THE WESTERN TROOPS ON THE GROUND!
SHAME ON YOU JOURNALISTS IN NOT REPORTING THAT THERE WERE WESTERN MERCENARIES PAID BY NATO DOING ATROCITIES IN LIBYA AGAINST THE LIBYAN PEOPLE.
SHAME ON YOU JOURNALISTS IN NOT REPORTING THAT THERE WERE QATARI TROOPS FROM THE BEGINNING OF THE SO CALLED PROTESTS IN BENGHAZI IN FEBRUARY 2011.
SHAME ON YOU JOURNALISTS IN NOT REPORTING THAT THE NTC ORGANIZATION ARE MORE CORRUPT, EX-CONS, TERRORISTS AND AS IF THAT IS NOT ENOUGH THESE TERRORISTS WHERE HARBORED IN ENGLAND AND IN THE UNITED STATES FOR DECADES! AND YOU JOURNALISTS KNEW IT! I WISH TO YOU THAT YOU HAVE ALL THE NIGHTMARES, OUR LIBYAN CHILDREN HAVE EVERYDAY WITH YOUR SO CALLED ‘HUMANITARIAN HELP’.
SHAME ON YOU JOURNALISTS IN REPORTING THE DEATH OF OUR LEADER AND SHOWING THE LYNCHING, SODOMIZING, BEATING OF AN OLD INJURED MAN AND YOU REPORTERS WATCHING THIS WHEN THE MOB KILLED HIM IN COLD BLOOD.
SHAME ON YOU JOURNALISTS IN REPORTING OUR LEADERS DEATH AND SHOWING CUES OF THE GANGS TO TAKE PICTURES OF A DEAD MAN IN A MEAT FREEZER AND YOU THOUGHT IT WAS FUNNY! YOU ARE THE WORST WHORES I HAVE EVER ENCOUNTERED IN MY LIFE!!!
I HOPE THAT THE DAY WILL SOON COME AND THE SAME THINGS HAPPENS TO YOU INDIVIDUALLY AND THAT YOU ALSO LOSE LOVED ONES AND YOUR COUNTRY IS BOMBED TO STONE AGE THE SAME WAY WE LIBYANS HAVE LOST LOVED ONES AND OUR COUNTRY IS IN SHAMBLES!
May God, Allah have mercy upon you and forgive you because I do not!
PLEASE WAKE UP! TAKE ACTION! YOUR VOICE IS YOUR WEAPON! ORGANIZE YOURSELVES AGAINST THE MASS MEDIA WHO IS WORKING FOR THE ABOVE ORGANIZATIONS! THE AXIS POWERS WANT GLOBALIZATION BUT THIS IS NOT THE ANSWER! THIS IS NOT DEMOCRACY! ALL THESE AUSTERITY CUTS IS TO FINANCE AND MAKE RICHER THE ABOVE ORGANIZATIONS.
If all of us join and make mass rallies we will win, stop being like the elephant who was chained since birth and knew nothing of its own power, ITS TIME TO BREAK THE CHAINS AND TAKE THE POWER BACK FROM THESE LECHES, WHO FEED FROM OUR BLOOD.
ITS TIME TO TAKE ACTION! WE CAN DO IT AND WE CAN SUCCEED!
It is necessary that men should understand things as they are, should call them by their right names, and should know that an army is an instrument for killing, and that the enrollment and management of an army...is a preparation for murder - Tolstoy