Russia’s Reaction to the Insults of the West is Political Suicide

March 17, 2018

by Peter Koenig for the Saker blogRussia’s Reaction to the Insults of the West is Political Suicide

The onslaught of western Russia bashing in the past days, since the alleged poison attack by a Soviet-era nerve agent, Novichok (the inventor of which, by the way, lives in the US), on a Russian double agent, Sergei Skripal and his daughter

Yulia, has been just horrifying. Especially by the UK. Starting with PM May, who outright accused Russia of using chemical weapons (CW) on UK grounds, without delivering any evidence. Strangely, there is no indication where Skripal and his daughter are, in which hospital the pair is being treated, no poison analysis is being published, they cannot be visited; there is absolutely no evidence of the substance they allegedly have been poisoned with – do Sergei and Yulia actually exist?

As a consequence, Theresa May expels 23 Russian diplomats, who have to leave the UK within a week. Then came Boris Johnson, the Foreign Minister clown, also an abject liar. He said, no he yelled, at his fellow parliamentarians that it was “Overwhelmingly likely, that Putin personally ordered the spy attack.” This accusation out of nothing against the Russian President is way more than a deep breach in diplomatic behavior, it is a shameful insult. – And no evidence is provided. Putin’s spokesman, Dmitry Peskov, in fact, said that Johnson’s personal attack on President Putin was “unforgivable”.

Not to miss out on the bashing theatre, UK Defense Secretary, Gavin Williamson, got even more insolent, Russia “should go away and shut up”. In response to all this demonizing Russia for an alleged crime, for which absolutely no proof has been provided, Russia’s Foreign Ministry spokeswoman, Maria Zakharova, said that the undiplomatic comments meant that the British authorities are nervous and have “something to hide,”. Lavrov also strongly objected, wanted to initiate a joint UK-Russia investigation into the case – is he dreaming? – and responded to a question of diplomatic retaliation, yes, that Russia will also expel UK diplomates ‘soon’.

There is no doubt that the UK acted as Washington’s poodle. In the course of this anti-Russia tirade, Trump twittered that he fully supported UK’s position. Indeed, the European puppets, Macron, Merkel, May and their chief, The Donald, signed a joint statement blaming Russia for the nerve gas attack on the former double agent, “There is no plausible alternative explanation than that Russia was to blame for the attack”. Bingo, that says it all. The presstitute picks it up and airs it to the seven corners of this globe – and the western sheeple are brainwashed once again: The Russian did it.

Well we know that. But the real point I want to make is that Russia always reacts to such nonsensical and outright false accusations; Russia always responds, rejects of course the accusations but usually with lengthy explanations, and with suggestions on how to come to the truth – as if the UK and the west would give a shit about the truth – why are they doing that? Why are you Russia, even responding?

That is foolish sign of weakness. As if Russia was still believing in the goodness of the west, as if it just needed to be awakened. What Russia is doing, every time, not just in this Skripal case, but in every senseless and ruthless attack, accusations about cyber hacking, invading Ukraine, annexing Crimea, and not to speak about the never-ending saga of Russia-Gate, Russian meddling and hacking into the 2016 US Presidential elections, favoring Trump over Hillary. Everybody with a half brain knows it’s a load of crap. Even the FBI and CIA said that there was no evidence. So, why even respond? Why even trying to undo the lies, convince the liars that they, Russia, are not culpable?

Every time the west notices Russia’s wanting to be a “good neighbor” – about which the west really couldn’t care less, Russia makes herself more vulnerable, more prone to be accused and attacked and more slandered.

Why does Russia not just break away from the west? Instead of trying to ‘belong’ to the west? Accept that you are not wanted in the west, that the west only wants to plunder your resources, your vast landmass, they want to provoke you into a war where there are no winners, a war that may destroy entire Mother Earth, but they, the ZionAnglo handlers of Washington, dream that their elite will survive to eventually take over beautiful grand Russia. That’s what they want. The Bashing is a means towards the end. The more people are with hem, the easier it is to launch an atrocious war.

The Skripal case is typical. The intensity with which this UK lie-propaganda has been launched is exemplary. It has brought all of halfwit Europe – and there is a lot of them – under the spell of Russia hating. Nobody can believe that May Merkel, Macron are such blatant liars… that is beyond what they have been brought up with. A lifelong of lies pushed down their throats, squeezed into their brains. Even if something tells them – this is not quite correct, the force of comfort, not leaving their comfort zone- not questioning their own lives – is so strong that they rather cry for War, War against Russia, War against the eternal enemy of mankind. – I sadly remember in my youth in neutral Switzerland, the enemy always, but always came from the East. He was hiding behind the “Iron Curtain”.

The West is fabricating a new Iron Curtain. But while doing that, they don’t realize they are putting a noose around their own neck. Russia doesn’t need the west, but the west will soon be unable to survive without the East, the future is in the east – and Russia is an integral part of the East, of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), that encompasses half the world’s population and controls a third of the world’s economic output.

Mr. Putin, you don’t need to respond to insults from the west, because that’s what they are, abusive insults. The abject slander that Johnson boy threw at you is nothing but a miserable insult; you don’t need to respond to this behavior. You draw your consequences.

Dear President Putin, Dear Mr. Lavrov, Let them! Let them holler. Let them rot in their insanity. – Respond to the UK no longer with words but with deeds, with drastic deeds. Close their embassy. Give all embassy staff a week to vacate your country, then you abolish and eviscerate the embassy the same way the US abolished your consulates in Washington and San Francisco – a bit more than a year ago. Surely you have not forgotten. Then you give all Brits generously a month to pack up and leave your beautiful country (it can be done – that’s about what Washington is forcing its vassals around the globe to do with North Korean foreign laborers); block all trade with the UK (or with the entire West for that matter), block all western assets in Russia, because that’s the first thing the western plunderers will do, blocking Russian assets abroad. Stealing is in their blood.

Mr. Putin, You don’t need to respond to their lowly abusive attacks, slanders, lies. You and Russia are way above the level of this lowly western pack. Shut your relation to the west. You have China, the SCO, the Eurasian Economic Union (EEU), Russia is part of the OBI – President Xi’s One Belt Initiative – the multi-trillion development thrive, emanating from China, connecting continents – Asia, Africa, Europe, South America – with infrastructure, trade, creating hundreds of millions of decent jobs, developing and promoting science and culture and providing hundreds of millions of people with a decent life.

What would the west do, if suddenly they had no enemy, because the enemy has decided to ignore them and take a nap? China will join you.

Everything else, responding, justifying, explaining, denying the most flagrant lies, trying to make them believe in the truth is not only a frustrating waste of time, it’s committing political suicide. You will never win. The west gives a hoot about the truth – they have proven that for the last two thousand years or more. And in all that time, not an iota of conscience has entered the west’s collective mind. The west cannot be trusted. Period.

Peter Koenig is an economist and geopolitical analyst. He is also a former World Bank staff and worked extensively around the world in the fields of environment and water resources. He lectures at universities in the US, Europe and South America. He writes regularly for Global Research; ICH; RT; Sputnik; PressTV; The 21st Century; TeleSUR; The Vineyard of The Saker Blog; and other internet sites. He is the author of Implosion – An Economic Thriller about War, Environmental Destruction and Corporate Greed – fiction based on facts and on 30 years of World Bank experience around the globe. He is also a co-author of The World Order and Revolution! – Essays from the Resistance.


Moscow Shuts British Council, Expels 23 Diplomats in Response to UK Move

Local Editor

The Russian Foreign Ministry said 23 UK diplomats must leave Russia in response to Britain’s “provocative actions and groundless accusations” over ex-double agent Sergei Skripal’s poisoning.


The British Council will also be shut.

In further details, Britain’s ambassador to Russia, Laurie Bristow, was summoned to the Foreign Ministry on Saturday morning, where he was informed of Moscow’s response to London’s claims that Russia is behind the alleged poisoning of Sergei Skripal, a former double agent, and his daughter, Yulia, on March 4 in Salisbury, UK.

On Friday, UK Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson suggested that Russian President Vladimir Putin had personally ordered the suspected nerve agent attack – a claim Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov called “shocking and unforgivable.”

“Sooner or later the British side would have to present some kind of comprehensive evidence [of Russia’s involvement], at least, to their partners [France, the US, Germany], who declared solidarity with London in this situation,” Peskov added.

Moscow has repeatedly offered its full cooperation in investigating the incident, which London claims involved a Soviet-era nerve agent called Novichok. Both nations are members of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons [OPCW], which means that London is obliged to include Moscow in the investigation.

Source: News Agencies, Edited by website team

Moscow Hits back at London, Expels 23 UK Diplomats

March 17, 2018

Russia UK flags

Moscow has found its way to respond to the recent UK move to expel Russian diplomats within the poisoning case of a former Russian agent.

The Russian Foreign Ministry declared on Saturday 23 employees of the UK Embassy in Moscow “personae non gratae” in response to the similar move made by London, the ministry said in a statement.

“A total of 23 diplomatic employees of the UK Embassy in Moscow are declared personae non gratae and must leave [Russia] within a week,” the statement read.

The ministry also revoked its agreement on opening and operation of the UK Consulate General in the Russian city of St. Petersburg, according to the statement.

A source in the ministry told Sputnik that the UK side would get the necessary time for closing the facility.

In addition, according to the statement, the activity of the British Council in Russia had been suspended over the lack of proper regulation, regarding its status.

“Since the legal status of the British Council in Russia has not been determined its operation is ceased,” the statement read.

The Foreign Ministry added that Moscow retained right to respond if the United Kingdom continued to take unfriendly steps against Russia.

The decision comes after earlier in the day the Russian Foreign Ministry summoned UK Ambassador to Russia Laurie Bristow.

Relations between Russia and the UK deteriorated in two recent weeks after former Russian intelligence officer Sergei Skripal and his daughter were found unconscious in a shopping center in Salisbury.

Following the incident, UK Prime Minister Theresa May said that it was “highly likely” that Russia was responsible for the incident since the two were poisoned with a Novichok class military-grade nerve agent that was developed in the Soviet Union.

On Wednesday, May went on to announce a package of anti-Russian measures, including the expulsion of Russian diplomats from the country, and the suspension of bilateral contacts between London and Moscow.


Related Articles

The Corruption Factor in US Military Spending–And Why Putin’s Claims are Likely Genuine

Posted on 

“US officials dismissed President Vladimir Putin’s boast of resurgent Russian military might as ‘cheesy’ and made clear that US defense and military capabilities remain ‘second to none.’”

So reported CNN yesterday in its assessment of Putin’s state of the nation speech.

A different view was taken by Paul Craig Roberts, who writes that the speech “revealed the existence of new Russian nuclear weapons that make it indisputably clear that Russia has vast nuclear superiority over the United States and its pathetic NATO vassal states.”

So we have US officials calling the Russian leader’s claims bogus and “cheesy” while Roberts takes them at face value. Obviously they can’t both be right, so who to believe?

Some would question how Russia could possibly produce weapons systems more advanced than the US when it spends a mere fraction of what the US does on defense–but such people are not factoring in what I would refer to as the “corruption factor.”

Included in the cost of each Aegis anti-missile platform produced by the US are the vast sums of money spent on political kickbacks and campaign contributions, as well as CEO salaries that are 250 times the average worker’s pay. The Russians, motivated by patriotism and a strong desire to protect their country from US attack, are not burdened with such expenses.

Russia spends approximately $69.3 billion a year on defense spending, compared to $585 billion spent by the US (figures by Wikipedia ). Or in other words–assuming the figures are more less accurate–Russia spends just 11.8% of what the US does. But if you eliminate the cost of buying off public officials, the astronomical CEO salaries, as well as other expenses encountered by US defense contractors–such as advertising and public relations, private jets, cost overruns, parties in plush hotels, etc.–then it is entirely feasible that Russian manufacturers have produced weapons systems capable of out-performing those built by their drunken and corrupt US counterparts and designed by their counterparts’ drunken and corrupt scientists.

Getting back to CNN, a second report, published today, asserts that one of the graphic animations that accompanied Putin’s speech actually depicts a missile attack upon the state of Florida, and the report quotes the State Department’s Heather Nauert to that effect.

“It was certainly unfortunate to have watched the video animation that depicted a nuclear attack on the United States,” Nauert is quoted as saying. “That’s certainly something that we did not enjoy watching. We don’t regard that as the behavior of a responsible international player.”

Here is the graphic from the speech they are now claiming represents an attack on Florida. The land mass doesn’t really look much like Florida, but I guess if you use your imagination you could construe it as such:

Roberts notes that in his speech Putin “declared that Russia has no territorial ambitions, no hegemonic ambitions, and no intention to attack any other country”–which is true. He did say this. And he actually emphasized the point quite strongly. But of course this will carry no weight whatsoever with the propagandists pounding the drums for war.

There is no capability of independent thinking in official Washington. Unless I miss my guess, not a single one of our politicians will be able to reason his or her way out of the parasitic-controlled group think that exists inside the beltway.


NATO is Turning Europe into a Battlefield against Russia


Italy’s Election Campaign. NATO has already Voted Before Us

There is a party that, even if it does not appear, takes part in the Italian elections: the NATO Party. It is formed by a transversal majority, that explicitly or tacitly supports Italy’s membership of the Great Alliance under U.S. command.

This explains why, at the height of the electoral campaign, the main parties tacitly accepted the additional commitments undertaken by the government in the meeting of 29 Nato ministers of Defence (for Italy Roberta Pinotti), on 14-15 February in Brussels.

The ministers first participated in the Nato Nuclear Planning Group, chaired by the United States, whose decisions are always top secret.

Then the ministers met at the level of North Atlantic Council. Just two hours later, they announced important decisions (already taken elsewhere) to “modernise the NATO Command Structure, the backbone of our Alliance”.

A new Joint Force Command for the Atlantic will be set up, probably located in the United States, in order to “protect sea lines of communication between North America and Europe”. Thus they invented the scenario of Russian submarines that could sink merchant ships on transatlantic routes.

A new Command for logistics will be set up, probably located in Germany, to “improve the movement in Europe of troops and equipment essential to our collective defense”. Thus they invented the scenario of a NATO forced to defend itself from an aggressive Russia. On the contrary, it is NATO that aggressively deploys its military forces along the border with Russia. Additional land component commands will be established in Europe to “further improve coordination and rapid response for our forces”.

NATO will also set up a new Cyber ​​Operations Centre to “further strengthen our defenses”. It will be located at the headquarters of Mons (Belgium), headed by the Supreme Allied Commander in Europe, who always is a U.S. General appointed by the President of the United States.

The ministers confirmed their commitment to increase military spending. Over the last three years, the European allies and Canada ncreased it by a total of $ 46 billion, but it is just the beginning. The goal is that every member country reaches at least 2% of the GDP (the US spend 4%), so as to have “more cash and therefore more military capabilities”.

The European countries that have so far reached and exceeded this quota are: Greece (2.32%), Estonia, Great Britain, Romania, Poland. The military spending of the European Union must be complementary to that of NATO. This was reiterated in a meeting with the EU foreign representative Federica Mogherini

Minister Pinotti confirmed that “Italy, respecting U.S. demand, has begun to increase spending for Defence” and that “we will continue on this road that is a road of responsibility”.

The way is therefore traced. But this is not talked about in the electoral campaign. While on Italy’s membership of the European Union the main parties have different positions, on the belonging of Italy to NATO are practically unanimous. This distorts the whole scenario.

We cannot discuss about the European Union while ignoring that 21 out of the 27 EU countries (after Brexit), with about 90% of the population of the Union, are members of NATO under U.S. command.

We cannot ignore the political and military consequences – as well as the economic, social and cultural ramifications of the fact that NATO is turning Europe into a battlefield against Russia, depicted as a threatening enemy: the new “empire of evil” attacking “the greatest democracy in the world” from the inside with its army of trolls.

Article in italiano :

Ha già votato la Nato prima di noi, 20 February 2018


الأطباق الطائرة الروسية تصل الى سورية.. ماهي المهمة المسندة لها؟؟

أكثر الأوصاف التي استمالت أذني واسترعت انتباهي وتركز حولها فضولي اثر وصول طائرات سوخوي 57 الروسية الى سورية على نحو مفاجئ .. هو قول أحد الخبراء البريطانيين بأن هذه الطائرات هي “أطباق طائرة” بكل معنى الكلمة لما مايلف خصائصها وامكانياتها من غموض لايقل عن الغموض الذي يلف الأطباق الطائرة .. ولكن مايتسرب من تقارير غربية عن امكانات هذه الطائرات يشير الى أنها طائرات غامضة القدرات والامكانات التي لاشك أنها خارقة وبأنها افضل ماأنجزه علم الطيران من عبقرية الانجاز البشري حسب مايشير اليه العسكريون ..


ويتم تداول خبر وصول هذه الطائرات بين الخيراء والسياسيين في صمت مشوب بالدهشة من هذه الخطوة الروسية غير المتوقعة والمذهلة والتي لايمكن أن تكون عبثا .. وهو أمر لم يقدم عليه الاتحاد السوفييتي نفسه في ذروة الحرب الباردة منذ أزمة الصواريخ في خليج الخنازير .. فهذه من أحدث الطائرات الاستراتيجية في العالم بل وفي التاريخ حتى الآن واعدادها لاتزال محدودة .. ولكنها تصل الى سورية في مهمة خاصة جدا .. وتكاد تسبب قلقا يساوي القلق من وصول الصواريخ السوفييتية الى خليج الخنازير في كوبا .. ولكن الفارق هو أن روسية اليوم هي التي تريد اخراج أميريكا من محيطها الحيوي وليست أميريكا التي تريد اخراج روسيا من محيطها الحيوي ..

الاميريكيون يقولون بحذر انها مجرد عملية تدريب روتينية لاجراء اختبارات ميدانية لهذه الطائرات الحديثة .. ولكن الروس لايمكن أن يضعوا احدى افضل الطائرات في العالم للاختبار الميداني لان المنطقة تشهد احتشادا للأسلحة والتكنولوجيا الغربية وهذا الاصطفاف بين المعسكرين لايمكن أن يكون فيه اي مجال للتجريب والاختبار بل لكل ماهو مجرب ومثبت القدرات لأن النزال هنا لايقبل الاحتمال بالهزيمة حتى ولو كان 1% خاصة أن الاميريكيين مشهورون بغدرهم وتمرسهم في الطعن من الخلف .. فمن الملاحظ أن الطائرات الروسية التي تشارك في الحملة السورية على الارهاب والرابضة في حميميم تتوضع وسط مربع ناتوي أضلاعه بين تركيا وقبرص واسرائيل والاردن وشرق سورية والعراق .. فكل عيون ومجسات حلف الناتو تتابعها لحظة بلحظة .. ففي الشمال قواعد تركيا وقاعدة انجرليك ومحطات حلف الناتو .. وفي قبرص قواعد للناتو ولبريطانية .. وفي الجنوب “اسرائيل” .. والى جانبها الاردن (وهو قاعدة بريطانية كبيرة) .. والى الغرب بدأ الاميريكون ينشرون محطات وقواعد بين العراق ونهر الفرات .. ولذلك فان هذه الطائرات الروسية الخارقة ليست في مهمة تدريبية وليست في مهمة اختبارات ميدانية .. ولكن مما لاشك فيه أنها طائرات لها مهمة خاصة جدا لها علاقة بتطورات عسكرية حساسة جدا حصلت أو ستحصل .. وربما يتعلق بمعادلة ردع صارمة لمنع مغامرة من مغامرات الجنرالات الاميريكيين ذوي الرؤوس الحامية الذين يريدون في مرحلة تحرير الغوطة القادمة (أو ادلب لاحقا) اللعب بالنار وتحريك سيناريوهات شيطانية ..

من الملاحظ أن الطائرات وصلت بعد احتكاك بين روسيا والغرب عبر اسقاط السوخوي 25 .. والتي تلاها مباشرة اسقاط الـ ف16 الاسرائيلية .. ومن الجلي أن هناك رغبة روسية في اثبات العزم الروسي على تغيير النظام العالمي بدءا من الشرق الأوسط .. ومنها الاصرار على اظهار التفوق الروسي الجوي على كل تقنيات الجو الغربية التي قد تحاول القيام بعملية غادرة للخروج من المأزق الذي وصلت اليه ..

مهما يكن سبب وصول الأطباق الطائرة الروسية الى سورية فان هذا يدل على أن الزمن تغير كثيرا .. وماسيتغير في قادمات الايام أكثر .. هناك ثقل جديد في العالم يتشكل .. والاميريكيون سيخرجون وأطباقهم فارغة من هذا الشرق الذي احرقوه من أجل أن يملؤوا أطباقهم بالنفط والغاز والذهب ..

فعندما تصل الأطباق الطائرة .. فهذا يعني أنه يجب على رعاة البقر وحلفائهم العودة بأطباقهم فارغة .. وربما بلا أطباق على الاطلاق .. بل أيد خاوية الوفاض .. وسأتمنى أن تخرج قطعان رعاة البقر حتى بلا أيد ولاأذرع .. ولا أرجل .. على نقالات وكراسي متحركة ..


   ( السبت 2018/02/24 SyriaNow)

Libya: From Africa’s Richest State Under Gaddafi, to Failed State After NATO Intervention


By Garikai Chengu,

This article was first published on October 19, 2014.

This week marks the three-year anniversary of the Western-backed assassination of Libya’s former president, Muammar Gaddafi, and the fall of one of Africa’s greatest nations.

In 1967 Colonel Gaddafi inherited one of the poorest nations in Africa; however, by the time he was assassinated, Gaddafi had turned Libya into Africa’s wealthiest nation. Libya had the highest GDP per capita and life expectancy on the continent. Less people lived below the poverty line than in the Netherlands.

After NATO’s intervention in 2011, Libya is now a failed state and its economy is in shambles. As the government’s control slips through their fingers and into to the militia fighters’ hands, oil production has all but stopped.

The militias variously local, tribal, regional, Islamist or criminal, that have plagued Libya since NATO’s intervention, have recently lined up into two warring factions. Libya now has two governments, both with their own Prime Minister, parliament and army.

On one side, in the West of the country, Islamist-allied militias took over control of the capital Tripoli and other cities and set up their own government, chasing away a parliament that was elected over the summer.

On the other side, in the East of the Country, the “legitimate” government dominated by anti-Islamist politicians, exiled 1,200 kilometers away in Tobruk, no longer governs anything.

The fall of Gaddafi’s administration has created all of the country’s worst-case scenarios: Western embassies have all left, the South of the country has become a haven for terrorists, and the Northern coast a center of migrant trafficking. Egypt, Algeria and Tunisia have all closed their borders with Libya. This all occurs amidst a backdrop of widespread rape, assassinations and torture that complete the picture of a state that is failed to the bone.

America is clearly fed up with the two inept governments in Libya and is now backing a third force: long-time CIA asset, General Khalifa Hifter, who aims to set himself up as Libya’s new dictator. Hifter, who broke with Gaddafi in the 1980s and lived for years in Langley, Virginia, close to the CIA’s headquarters, where he was trained by the CIA, has taken part in numerous American regime change efforts, including the aborted attempt to overthrow Gaddafi in 1996.

In 1991 the New York Times reported that Hifter may have been one of “600 Libyan soldiers trained by American intelligence officials in sabotage and other guerrilla skills…to fit in neatly into the Reagan Administration’s eagerness to topple Colonel Qaddafi”.

Hifter’s forces are currently vying with the Al Qaeda group Ansar al-Sharia for control of Libya’s second largest city, Benghazi. Ansar al-Sharia was armed by America during the NATO campaign against Colonel Gaddafi. In yet another example of the U.S. backing terrorists backfiring, Ansar al-Sharia has recently been blamed by America for the brutal assassination of U.S. Ambassador Stevens.

Hifter is currently receiving logistical and air support from the U.S. because his faction envision a mostly secular Libya open to Western financiers, speculators, and capital.

Perhaps, Gaddafi’s greatest crime, in the eyes of NATO, was his desire to put the interests of local labour above foreign capital and his quest for a strong and truly United States of Africa. In fact, in August 2011, President Obama confiscated $30 billion from Libya’s Central Bank, which Gaddafi had earmarked for the establishment of the African IMF and African Central Bank.

In 2011, the West’s objective was clearly not to help the Libyan people, who already had the highest standard of living in Africa, but to oust Gaddafi, install a puppet regime, and gain control of Libya’s natural resources.

For over 40 years, Gaddafi promoted economic democracy and used the nationalized oil wealth to sustain progressive social welfare programs for all Libyans. Under Gaddafi’s rule, Libyans enjoyed not only free health-care and free education, but also free electricity and interest-free loans. Now thanks to NATO’s intervention the health-care sector is on the verge of collapse as thousands of Filipino health workers flee the country, institutions of higher education across the East of the country are shut down, and black outs are a common occurrence in once thriving Tripoli.

One group that has suffered immensely from NATO’s bombing campaign is the nation’s women. Unlike many other Arab nations, women in Gaddafi’s Libya had the right to education, hold jobs, divorce, hold property and have an income. The United Nations Human Rights Council praised Gaddafi for his promotion of women’s rights.

When the colonel seized power in 1969, few women went to university. Today, more than half of Libya’s university students are women. One of the first laws Gaddafi passed in 1970 was an equal pay for equal work law.

Nowadays, the new “democratic” Libyan regime is clamping down on women’s rights. The new ruling tribes are tied to traditions that are strongly patriarchal. Also, the chaotic nature of post-intervention Libyan politics has allowed free reign to extremist Islamic forces that see gender equality as a Western perversion.

Three years ago, NATO declared that the mission in Libya had been “one of the most successful in NATO history.” Truth is, Western interventions have produced nothing but colossal failures in Libya, Iraq, and Syria. Lest we forget, prior to western military involvement in these three nations, they were the most modern and secular states in the Middle East and North Africa with the highest regional women’s rights and standards of living.

A decade of failed military expeditions in the Middle East has left the American people in trillions of dollars of debt. However, one group has benefited immensely from the costly and deadly wars: America’s Military-Industrial-Complex.

Building new military bases means billions of dollars for America’s military elite. As Will Blum has pointed out, following the bombing of Iraq, the United States built new bases in Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Oman and Saudi Arabia.

Following the bombing of Afghanistan, the United States is now building military bases in Pakistan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan.

Following the recent bombing of Libya, the United States has built new military bases in the Seychelles, Kenya, South Sudan, Niger and Burkina Faso.

Given that Libya sits atop the strategic intersection of the African, Middle Eastern and European worlds, Western control of the nation, has always been a remarkably effective way to project power into these three regions and beyond.

NATO’s military intervention may have been a resounding success for America’s military elite and oil companies but for the ordinary Libyan, the military campaign may indeed go down in history as one of the greatest failures of the 21st century.


Garikai Chengu is a research scholar at Harvard University. Contact him on

Jim Mattis refutes the « Fake News » from israël and NATO


The Atlantist Press has been claiming for years that President Bachar el-Assad used chemical weapons against his own people. Except that according to US Secretary for Defense, General Jim Mattis, this is fake news. Like Saddam Hussein’s chemical weapons, this story, which has been occupying the columns of newspapers for the last five years, is pure war propaganda.

JPEG - 28.1 kb

This should have been headline news in all the Western news outlets. But only Newsweek mentioned it [1]. During his Press conference on 2 February, Secretary for Defense General Jim Mattis indicated that while he « thought » that Damascus had used chemical weapons against his own people, no-one in the Pentagon has ever provided the slightest proof.

The journalist, who knows General Jim Mattis personally, heard him declare, off the record, his aversion for the myth of Syrian chemical weapon. He offered him the opportunity to repeat his claim, this time in public. Here is the transcript of this conversation (published a little late).

- Question : Is there any proof that chlorine weapons were used – proof of chlorine weapons?
- Jim Mattis : I think so.
- Question : No, I know, I heard you.
- Jim Mattis : I believe they have been used several times. And that, as you know, is a rather specific category, that’s why I ruled out sarin as being something different – yeah.
- Question : So there is credible proof that sarin and chlorine …
- Jim Mattis : No, I don’t have any proof, not specifically. I don’t have proof. What I’m saying is that other groups on the ground, NGO’s, soldiers on the ground, have said that sarin was used. So we’re looking for proof. I have no proof, either credible or non-credible.

Source : “Media Availability by Secretary Mattis at the Pentagon”, Press Secretary, Departement of Defence, February 2, 2018

JPEG - 30.7 kb

At the beginning of the war, the Syrian Arab Republic asked the UNO to come and investigate the use of chemical weapons by the jihadists. The inspectors found nothing convincing. But in August 2013, the states who were supporting the project by the Muslim Brotherhood reversed the accusation and claimed, on the sole basis of information from Mossad Unit 8200, that the Syrian army had just massacred approximately 1,500 civilians in the Ghouta with a mixture of gases, including sarin.

Attesting to the good faith of Syria, Russia proposed that it join the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on their Destruction. Working together, Moscow and Washington destroyed the totality of Syrian chemical weapons and the precursors (which is to say the substances necessary for the manufacture of such weapons).

However, the accusation of the use of these weapons has not ceased. Even though the Pentagon itself had supervised their destruction, the Atlantist Press persisted in pretending that the Syrian Arab Army was using them. Certain medias, like the Anglo-Saxon Bellingcat (whose director is an employee of the Atlantic Council) [2] or the French Le Monde [3] have become professional repeaters of this Fake News.

To put an end to the rumour, a joint system of enquiry was set up by the UNO and the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW). After having organised, from New York and Vienna, a vast compilation of information, this authority refused to go and check the information on-site, and even refused to take samples. Tension increased at the Security Council, where anyone could note the influence exercised by the number 2 of the UN administration – neo-conservative Jeffrey Feltman [4] – over US ambassador Nikki Haley. Finally, we counted as many as five Russian vetos against the Western lies on this subject alone [5].

At the moment of the Khan Cheikhoun affair, the United States claimed, straight-faced, that they had proof of Syrian responsibility – proof that, according to General Mattis, had never existed – and punished Syria by bombing the base at Cheyrat.

Secretary for Defense Robert McNamara admitted that the United States lied in order to launch and pursue their war against the Vietnamese people. His successor Colin Powell admitted he had lied to the Security Council in order to launch the war against the Iraqi people. And so on … But they all confessed after having spilled blood and after having left their official functions. None of them faced criminal charges.

Just as in US commercial law, US leaders can go bankrupt, fail to reimburse their creditors and reboot their businesses from zero as if nothing had happened.

For the first time, an incumbent Secretary for Defense has denounced the lies of Israël, his own administration, and NATO. Although he was careful to present himself as being convinced of Syria’s guilt, his declaration refutes the justifications for the Israëli bombing in Syria, allegedly to destroy chemical weapons. For his colleagues Rex Tillerson and Nikki Haley, his stand is irrevocable. It sounds a warning to the 23 Ministers of Foreign Affairs who, on 23 January, once again accused Syria of using chemical weapons [6] – these are Ministers who have spoken in favour of « democracy » in the Levant… on the sole condition that Bachar el-Assad refrains from presenting himself for a Presidential election he could win.

Pete Kimberley

%d bloggers like this: