According to non-partisan, pan-ideological lore in 2017, Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi gave up his quest for nukes in 2003—spooked by the Iraq war or strong-armed by imperialism or just trying to be nice, depending on the lesson plan. But instead of making his regime more secure, the gesture only secured his eventual downfall.
“North Koreans invariably mention the former Libyan leader Muammar Qaddafi,” Evan Osnos wrote inThe New Yorker following a recent trip to Pyongyang. And these North Korean officials cite the officially prepared narrative: that in December 2003, following talks that the U.S. president said began when the U.S. and UK invaded Iraq nine months earlier, the government of Colonel Gaddafi announced it was giving up on nuclear deterrence.
As Bush recounted in his 2004 State of the Union address, “the leader of Libya voluntarily pledged to disclose and dismantle all of his regime’s weapons of mass destruction programs, including a uranium-enrichment project for nuclear weapons.” Gaddafi, Bush said, “correctly judged that his country would be better off and far more secure without weapons of mass murder.”
The North Korean state, seeing how Gaddafi was executed less than eight years later by rebels with NATO air support, claims to have learned a lesson: that the Libyan leader signed his death warrant when he traded weapons for diplomatic relations. “It has been shown to the corners of the earth that Libya’s giving up its nuclear arms, which the U.S. liked to chatter on about, was used as an invasion tactic to disarm the country,” North Korea’s Foreign Ministry said in a 2011 statement. A Foreign Ministry official repeated the claim in an October 5 interview with Nick Kristof, which The New York Times columnist left unchallenged.
This is also the tidy narrative adopted by the current White House to explain why diplomacy won’t work with Pyongyang. “The lessons that we learned out of Libya giving up its nukes is, unfortunately, if you had nukes, never give them up,” U.S. Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats said at the Aspen Security Forum in July 2017. A write-up in The Interceptreported that comment as detailing how, with respect to proliferation, “we got to this point,” a fact—disarmament followed by regime change prompting others to build and test more nukes—“shamelessly denied” by the previous administration.
Business news network CNBC has likewise speculated that North Korea’s “refusal to drop its nuclear weapons program may have a lot to do with the fate that met [Gaddafi],” while Doug Bandow of the libertarian Cato Institute is less equivocal, saying that, with respect to Libya, “Pyongyang saw America’s policy plain.”
Farewell to Arms?
But Libya never gave up nuclear arms; it never had them—it hardly even had what might be called a “program.” And that 2003 deal was followed not by preparations for war against a newly disarmed enemy, but a shameful period of normalization that saw respected politicians in the U.S. and Europe flatter the Libyan dictator with praise and arms, all while their governments abducted and extradited his political opponents.
Amid that deplorable friendship, North Korea, in 2006, conducted its first nuclear weapons test. As analyst Samuel Ramani argues, it was the NATO intervention in Kosovo, and “NATO’s decision not to remove [Slobodan] Milosevic from power in 1999,” that informed North Korean policy to build up a conventional and nuclear deterrent. “From Pyongyang’s vantage point, NATO’s restrained military intervention in Yugoslavia demonstrated that the United States was only willing to carry out military interventions if they resulted in few casualties,” Ramani writes.
What happened in Libya years later may not have discouraged Pyongyang’s thinking with respect to deterrence, but it was at best a data point. And the Islamic Republic of Iran, for years in the crosshairs of America’s most belligerent militarists, even cheered Gaddafi’s downfall, congratulating the Libyans for changing their regime with a “popular uprising.” It then agreed to curb its own nuclear program.
That Libyan WMDs were real and a threat has served everyone’s interests. Gaddafi had since the late 1990s sought “normalized relations with the United States,” former CIA analyst Flynt Leverett noted in a 2004 piece for the Brookings Institution, while Bush and Blair, dealing with an insurgency in Iraq, desired vindication. A dictator giving up his WMDs, just months after the March 2003 invasion, would do just right.
As with Iraq, however, inspectors found no evidence to back the atomic hyperbole. In February 2004, three months after the weapons deal was announced, the International Atomic Energy Agency issued a report declaring that its inspectors could find no facilities in Libya “dedicated to nuclear weapon component manufacturing.” What it found instead, by way of Libyan officials, were “a series of engineering drawings relating to nuclear weapons components” and “notes (many of them handwritten) related to the fabrication of weapon components.”
Libya did possess some potentially dual-use nuclear opponents, including two centrifuges and uranium hexafluoride with which to feed them, according to the Arms Control Association. But, according to the IAEA, there was no evidence the Libyan regime ever tried to build a nuclear weapon.
Libya Rewarded
Giving up this on-paper nuclear program was richly rewarded. Within four months, British Prime Minister Tony Blair was extending Gaddafi the “hand of friendship,” naming General Robin Searby his government’s “defense coordinator with Libya under an agreement to advise and train members of the Libyan army,” according to The Independent. Critics, the account continued, complained that Libya’s “capacity and willingness to develop and deploy WMDs has been exaggerated to make the diplomatic breakthrough appear much more significant.”
General Searby would himself echo those critics years later, telling Al Jazeera in 2011 that Libyan weapons programs were so primitive that “they tried to make things fly which would go a few yards then explode or turn around head straight back towards them.” Although there were chemical weapons and stockpiles of chemicals that could have been used to make more—the last removed in 2016, post-regime change—Searby said he had “no knowledge” of the biological weapons said to be part of the deal, an apparent embellishment.
By the time that news came out, the Libyan government had already obtained over $143 million in weapons and other military equipment from British arms dealers, including the riot gear and tear gas that security forces used against Arab Spring protests against Gaddafi’s regime. Many other Western governments supplied the bullets, with the European Union selling $1 billion in arms in the five years following the lifting of the arms embargo on Libya, with Gaddafi promising—for a fee—to help keep Black migrants out of Europe.
Rather than plan for a full-scale invasion against a freshly neutered pest, the U.S and Europe propped up the Gaddafi regime, snatching families and delivering them to be detained and tortured by the Libyan government. On the eve of the Arab Spring, the U.S. government was preparing not for war, but for business “on an increasing scale,” according to the Associated Press, having planned to sell the Libyan military $77 million in armored troop carriers. Military exports were only suspended weeks after the first reports of massacres carried out by forces who benefitted from U.S. military training (with Blair whispering in the ear of “the leader” to try and talk him down).
Just as it served the political and financial interests of many to pretend that the 2003 deal with Libya was more than spectacle, it has been useful to many of all political stripes, post-2011, to omit the fact that Gaddafi’s relations with the West had been normalized and that Libya had become just another place to sell weapons, buy oil, and deposit the unfortunates kidnapped by the CIA and MI6.
Gaddafi was never the reformed villain Bush and Blair made him out to be, nor was he an anti-imperialist martyr done in by naiveté and disarmament. If the West had thought him more of a burden than a viable business partner back in 2003, the Libyan military (and its missiles that wouldn’t fly right) weren’t standing in the way of changing his regime.
It serves a popular storyline to act otherwise, with all sides, foreign and domestic, now omitting years of incriminating friendship. But the propaganda we serve ourselves is now serving to inform policy in an increasingly authoritarian dystopia: the Trump administration’s United States, which believes this tale to be evidence that diplomacy is no way to achieve disarmament. Truth is often a casualty of war, and mutually agreed upon deception is also a damningly myopic way to prevent one.
Charles Davis is a journalist in Los Angeles whose work has been published by outlets such as Al Jazeera, The Daily Beast, The New Republic and Vice. Photo: Muammar Gaddafi (openDemocracy via Flickr)
This is the UN, this is the New World Order, they steal the assets of a country and use the stolen money to control and destroy. They are war criminals of the highest order, they are thieves, liars and rapists. The crimes that they commit against humanity are innumerable, they are the bane of the planet.
The saga of the criminal destruction and destabilization of the sovereign nation of Libya continues.
During the past few months, the Green Resistance (the movement against the criminals illegally occupying Libya by force) has come to control more than 80% of Libya. This movement is backed by the majority of all the Libyan tribes. As they encroach slowly upon the last area controlled by the radical Islamic terrorist militias and the UN puppet government, fear is creeping up on the criminal occupiers. Fear of loss, fear of retribution, fear of prosecution for crimes against humanity, war crimes and theft of the assets belonging to the Libyan people. This fear has caused these criminals to make stupid, spur of the moment decisions that shows just how desperate they have become and who they really are…
The appointed President of the UN Puppet Government (so called Unity Government or Al-Wefaq in Arabic) is named Faiez Al-Serraj, he is aligned with all of the criminal mercenaries and radical militias in Libya. The UN puppet government has no authority under Libyan law, was not elected but gained his position from the UN in a meeting in Tunisia. The people of Libya did not recognize this puppet government and refused to allow it inside Libya, so the UN sneaked this group of criminals into Tripoli in the middle of the night by boat and declared them the “Internationally recognized” government. This is quite convenient for the US and UN as anytime the US wants to bomb Libya or drop into Libya and pick up Libyan citizens, they state that the “internationally recognized” government has given them permission.
A short history on the UN puppet government and their members – Quote: Dr. Saif al Ghadafi
” in complement of its series of crimes against the Libyans, the Western countries have appointed a war criminal who was responsible for the destruction of Bani Walid and killing of its children, “Abdul- Rahman Al-Swehli” as a head of Libya’s highest authority, the State Council and appointed his nephew, “Ahmed Maiteeq” 44 Vice President, his niece “Nihad Meitiq” 45 General Director of the Foreign and his brother in law, Faiez Al-Serraj, head of the presidential Council.”
Seeing his end in sight, Serraj, decided to solicit/bribe with 50 million Libyan Dinars (stolen Libyan money), a man named Osama al-Juwaili (a rubbish rat who turned on his own people and country) to lead his militias and mercenaries in an attack against the Wershaffana tribe. The Wershaffana tribe is the 2nd largest tribe in Libya and is from Tripoli and the surrounding areas. This tribe controls the gates of Tripoli and the small surrounding towns. al Juwaili is a well known criminal in Libya and is a part of the Zentan tribe. It should be noted that he is in a break away small radical group from the main Zentan tribe. He was fighting with Khalifa Haftar (CIA operative) at the beginning of the 2011 invasion of Libya when Haftar was leading the mercenaries and radicals against the legitimate government of Libya. When Haftar changed sides (big question here) and started fighting the same mercenaries, al Juwaili broke away and started his own militias. al Juwaili is aligned with the Zionists that destroyed Libya, his main connection is with a man named Bernard Levy, well known Zionist who shows up in every country that the Zionist cabal has targeted for destruction. http://libyanwarthetruth.com/israel-involvement-fake-revolution He is also aligned with the terrorist Belhaj, the LIFG, the Misurata militias, the UN puppet government and other radical militia groups working hand in hand with the Zionists/UN attempting to keep Libya broken.
These criminal gangs and puppet governments have kept all resources away from the people of Libya and the tribes all the while becoming millionaires and billionaires. Try to understand, it is like some criminal moved into your home, took over all your bank accounts, your food, water, medicine, fuel, etc. They allowed you nothing but a crumb to live on, meanwhile they were stealing all your wealth, locking you in rooms for years without medical care, raping your daughters and sons and acting as if everything you owned is theirs, including the right to negotiate on your behalf. This is how Hillary Clinton, John McCain, Sarkozy, Obama and the Zionist Cabal continue to destroy the lives and homeland of Libya. You can imagine the frustration for the Libyan people as they fight to regain their homeland, and are still being embargoed from purchasing weapons by the UN, meanwhile the criminals are fed billions and supplied with any weapons they desire.
The Wershaffana tribe struggled with disagreements inside their council as to their loyalties, etc., in 2011. But, today the biggest majority of the Wershaffana are pro Green, they stand with the Green resistance against the radical militias and puppet governments. They are a strong tribe with a strong militia arm led by General Omar Tantush. Because of the threat made against the Wershaffana tribe by the criminals occupying Libya, all the Libyan tribes are now supporting their Wershaffana brothers. Instead of separating the tribes, it has brought them closer.
This is the UN, this is the New World Order, they steal the assets of a country and use the stolen money to control and destroy. They are war criminals of the highest order, they are thieves, liars and rapists. The crimes that they commit against humanity are innumerable, they are the bane of the planet.
We stand with the great tribes of Libya in their struggle against the criminal NWO cabal that is continuing to poison their land. They will win and in that beautiful North African country, we will see a victory for all mankind.
This memorandum aimed to pinpoint some of facts that the Libyan people were subjected to during the past six years where the most horrendous crimes were committed against its people. These crimes were committed under the name of human intervention, protection of civilians, introducing democracy and prosperity where the NATO forces, with the help of some Arab countries and a few Libyans, attacked Libya with all weapons under its disposal. The justifications put forward were as false as the invasion of Iraq in 2003, and in fact it was a systematic destruction of a sovereign country and a peaceful nation. Thus far, this memorandum is trying to present these crimes to the international community, human rights organisation and NGOs in order to stand by Libya and its people in its countless efforts to rebuild this small country.
Libya on the Cross Roads: The Beginning
Libya’s agony began on 15th February 2011 when a number of protests gathered, in its routine, to demonstrate in support for the Abu Saleem prisons incident. The demonstration was soon hijacked by elements of Jihadist groups such the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group LIFG. They attacked police stations and army barracks in Derna, Benghazi, Misratah and Al-Zawayh aiming at collecting weapons to be used in their planned war against the Libyan people and its legitimate government. All these actions accompanied by a propaganda machine were launched by Aljazeera channel, Al-Arabiya, BBC, France 24 and others which were encouraging the Libyan people to confront the state police who try to protect governmental buildings and people’s properties from attacks and lootings.
Horrific scenes unfolded in the streets, bridges, and security forces buildings where the demonstrators committed unspeakable crimes against humanity. Security forces, military personnel and policemen were slaughtered as their throats were cut, their hearts were taken out of their bodies and their bodies cut into pieces in a real show of brutality and savageness. For instance, in the first day of unrest 16-02-2011 and in the city of Misrata, the so called peaceful demonstrators have killed and burnt a man named Musa Al-Ahdab. On the same day and in Benghazi a police officer was killed and his limbs were cut in pieces. [1] Those barbaric actions were committed by the armed demonstrators as they were using tanks, machine guns and anti-aircrafts machine guns throughout the cities of Misrata, Benghazi and Al-Azawiyah [2]. These acts and scenes are well documented and can be seen on YouTube [3] and across social media.
Thus, the fallen victims were in their tens contrary to what was reported by the biased media. According to Aljazeera, Al-Arabiya and the Libyan oppositions groups, by the end of 2011 the number of people killed reached 50,000. However, in 2012 Abdulrahaim Alkeeb’s government announced that the number of victims from 17th February 2011 to the end of the war in October 2011 were 4,700 including the people who died via natural death [4]. The highly claimed number of victims remained statistics figures without releasing the victims’ names or their identity as well as to claim for compensation from the governments.
The propaganda campaign and lies that accompanied the military insult did not stop at the aggregation of the victims but claimed that the regime used military aircrafts to attack the civilians, reported rapes by the army and security forces, [5] Viagra found in tanks, [6] African and Algerian mercenaries fighting along the Libyan army and the airmen defections to Malta. [7] None of these claims proven until today and in fact bears any truth what so ever. UN, Western investigations, Amnesty International and the Human Rights Watch [8] have not proven any case of rip from the total of 8000 reported cases by the Libyan opposition figures. In fact, all these cases were fabricated and lacked credibility. On the same ground, the use of Mirage aircraft from Al-Weathy airbase in the far West of Libya to attack the civilians in Benghazi also bears no weight as these aircrafts could not attack targets in Benghazi and return to its base in the West due to the distance and fuel consumption. It is impossible for this type of aircraft to attack targets in 1500 KM and return without refuelling as well as there were airbases around Benghazi accessible to the Libyan government to be used if needed. Also, the Viagra found in tanks story was fallen on the same trap as the Libyan army has a professional, moral young army that neither think to commit such crimes nor need Viagra to activate their sexual desires. These fabricated stories are merely a SEX IT UP on the same line with the Iraqi seven minutes MWDs attack. Now, the Iraqi and the Libyan cases became laughing matters by the Iraqi, Libyan people, the American and the European media. (Amnesty Report [9])
The International Court of Justice (ICC)
The ICC [10] issued a warrant of arrest for Muammar Qaddafi, Saif Al-Islam Qaddafi [11] and Abdullah Al-Senussi in 2011, charged with crimes against humanity allegedly committed in Libya. Despite the seriousness of the crime, the ICC has not conducted any investigations on the ground (Libya) as well as it reached its conclusions and identified the perpetrators within two weeks from the UN resolution for the ICC to proceed its work. The timing given for the charge to be announced was not presented and was not enough to even issue and investigate traffic penalties. In this effect, Al-Jehani, the ICC-Libyan government coordinator, asserted that, “the ICC case against Libya was purely political because the NATO countries order the National Transitional Council (NTC) to prepare a list of officials for the ICC to be charged for crimes against humanity”. The NTC assigned Al-Jehani to prepare the list who produced and presented tens of names, however, the ICC selected only the above three names. In his statement Al-Jehani also added that all the accusation was fabricated. He also asserted his views when he met Saif Al-Islam and told him that it’s impossible for the Libyan judiciary to find you guilty. Al-Jehani added that we (Al-Jehani and his team) fabricated this case against him because we simply knew in advance that the criminal part is a lost case but we brought it forward to implicate Saif Al-Islam in financial and corruption cases.
Al-Jehani has justified his fabrications and lies as these lies are permissible during wars but it’s hard to be proven in the law of court, (Al-Jehani statement documented on 1/1/2012 and field in Al-Zintan court).
The ICC adopted a double standard on Libya’s civil war and the NATO intervention, implicating the Libyan political figures in fabricated crimes where ignored and failed to condemn the barbaric killing of Qaddafi [12] and his son Al-Motassem by the NATO backed militias. [13] The only action the ICC made was to drop the case against Qaddafi after his death. However, the ICC had a strong case as the killing was well documented by the media and needs no evidence to bring those responsible to justice. The ICC could also easily reach and arrest these perpetrators as they assumed political positions and diplomatic posts in various European capitals. A similar position was taken by the ICC against Abduallah Al-Senussi who was kidnapped from Mauritania by the Libyan government, [14] it stopped calling for his extradition to stand trial at the ICC. It did not even follow his human rights violation and inhuman treatment in the militia’s prison even though he has been imprisoned by the well-known notorious jihadists, the Libyan Fighting Islamic Group. The head of the prison is the leader of LIFG, Abdul Hakiem Belhadj.
Belhaj is well-known to the CIA and Western governments. The CIA arrested him after his escape from Kandahar, interrogated and extradited to Libya in 2002 charging with terrorism. [15] In 2009, he and the LIFG members were released from prison under the General Amnesty Law. [16] Belhadj terrorist record speaks for itself. In 1994-97, he ordered a slaughter of 225 people and ordered the killing of the German tourists, Steven Baker and his wife Manuela Spiatzier in 1997. Nevertheless, he assumed a high-ranking position in Libya. He was a minister of Defence, and is responsible of Tripoli security, General Manager of Libyan prisons and responsible directly of Al-Senussi cell. Bearing in mind Belhadj’s criminal record, the ICC expressed its reassurance that Al-Senussi is in the safe hands and supported his trial in Libya.
The NATO and small Gulf countries ignored Belhadj terrorist activities and recognised him as a political and military leader and above all a businessman. He owned the biggest TV station in North Africa, biggest airline company in Libya, cement factory, properties in Spain and Turkey and a private airport in Tripoli. This airport, however, has been used to channel and transport the terrorists from Libya to Syria. These terrorists were financed which was estimated to be 160 billion worth of dollars in 2010.
Belhaj and others are responsible of the misuse of Libya’s assets and putting an end to Libya’s development plan worth 200 billion of dollars according to the World Bank. Belhaj is one example to the warlords’ lavish life where the ordinary Libyan citizens were plunged into severe poverty.
The Militias Human Rights Abuses
The militias’ leaders and war lords has committed heinous crimes against humanity, destroyed cities and vital infrastructures throughout the past six years. The following are few of the listed crimes – People were burned, cooked alive and subjected to the ugliest forms of torture. Political prisoners, security personals and soldiers were thrown in the Iron and Steel smelting furnaces plant of Misratah. Above all, the militias traded in the prisons’ human organs. With the Libyan political scene growing more complicated, IS has also added more atrocities by slaughtering, crucifying people and cutting their organs in dramatic senses.
Unprecedented racial and ethnic cleansing, genocide was committed against five Libyan cities and its people. 55% of Libyan people were forced to flee their country to the neighbouring countries. In addition, hundreds of houses were burnt in Bani Walid [17] and five other cities in Warshafana. [18] Furthermore, the destruction and flattening of the city of Sirte [19] and bombardment of residential populated areas in Benghazi [20] and Dernah. Even the cosmopolitan Tripoli faced the same faith of ethnic and racial cleansing especially in the areas loyal to Qaddafi.
Besides the systematic human rights abuses, the militias and their leaders destroyed the Libyan essential infrastructures. [21] In July 2014, they set Tripoli airport and the aviation fleet on fire as well burning number 24 & 25 oil reservoirs. [22] [23] [24] [25]
Despite the militias destructive actions and brutal torture, the international community and the UN legal bodies ignored all these crimes and failed to bring these warlords to justice [26].
NATO and Libyan Militias’ Atrocities against Civilian and Public Figures
The NATO military aircrafts targeted civilians across various Libyan cities, namely Zlitan, Sirte, Surman, Tripoli and Bani Walid. In the south of Zlitan and precisely in Majeer, [27] 84 families mainly women and children were killed in cold blood while they were sleeping by NATO airstrikes. [28] Media showed children’s bodies pulled out of rubble and a lady named Minsyah Khleifa Heblow was halved in two and others lay dead in a very disturbing scene. In another case, the Khawildi Al-Ahmadi family was killed as NATO airstrikes hit their house and consequently killed two of their children. [29] Also, Al-Jafarh family were killed in Bani Walid [30] as NATO targeted their house during the Holy month of Ramadan. Not to mention, the well documented and deliberate NATO Arial bombardment of Qaddafi and his convoy in Sirte and the killing of Qaddafi’s youngest son, Saif Al-Arab in his house in Tripoli. [31]
The human rights abuse and systematic killing and torture of Libyan civilians continued after the militias assumed control of Libya. These people were civilians that did not participate in the civil war and the majority were old and cannot carry weapons. The popular comedian Youssef Al-Gharyani was detained and tortured by Al-Zawiyah militias.
Misratah militias has also detained and tortured the eighty-year-old and the Libyan Mufti in the 1970s, Al-Shaiek Al-Madani Al-Shwearief, [32] because he did not approve and support the NATO intervention in Libya. [33] The famous Libyan singer, Mohammed Hassan, was abused and put under house arrest. [34] Others like the economist expert in the Ministry of Finance, Dr Abdul Hafied Al-Zalatni, was tried and sentenced to years of imprisonment. Likewise, the Head of Islamic Call Society, Dr Mohammed Al-Shareef was sentenced for long term imprisonment. The Head of Customs Department and the Head of Training at the Ministry of Interior were also sentenced to long term imprisonment along with others who were sentenced to the death penalty and various terms of imprisonments. It’s rather absurd that these public figures were tried for drugs trafficking, human trafficking and rape in addition to 17 other charges. [35] The question that presents itself is how all these old professional figures met and conspire together to commit crimes throughout a period of nine months?
After NATO helped those militias to rule Libya, more horrific terrorist crimes were committed against Libyan and foreign nationals. A Coptic man was killed at the Misratah’s battalion, [36] murdering number of Coptic men in Sirte, [37] murdering a number of Christian Ethiopian workers, [38] murdering the American English teacher, Roni Smith, in Benghazi, [39] killing the Red Cross staff in Misratah in 2014 [40] and the French Embassy bombing in Tripoli, [41] above all, the murder of the American Ambassador in Benghazi, who helped and armed the militias throughout 2011. [42]
All the above victims were reported by the Human Rights Watch and in some cases NATO admitted responsibility of their death. However, the ICC turned a blind eye and failed to investigate such crimes despite various national and international bodies which demanded to initiate an open and transparent investigation as well as bringing perpetrates to justice. The ICC record showed failure in its responsibility regarding Libya’s civil war. It was evident as it has not produced a single warrant of arrest against these militia leaders and NATO forces. It seemed that it has been a deliberate policy of ICC to ignore these authentic crimes and only focuses on Saif Al-Islam indictment and trial.
When it comes to Qaddafi’s family, the ICC are seen not to be serious as in the case of Al-Saadi Qaddafi torture that the ICC prosecutor claimed that she is still investigating the case. However, he was shown in a video being interrogated and beaten in front of the camera. The same standard applied to the Abduallah Al-Senussi case where the ICC prosecutor claimed that she is still in deliberation of his death penalty. A similar claim was made by her predecessor regarding the bombing and killing of Qaddafi and hundreds in his convoy. The ICC never showed any seriousness in other crimes committed by the militias against thousands of Libyan people, except Saif Al-Islam in order to silent his voice and eliminate potential leadership.
The NATO countries and the Gulf mini-states should be held responsible for the chaos that has been created in Libya since 2011. They intervened in Libya in the pretext of Qaddafi killing his own people. The scenario of a leader killing his own people reminds us of Tony Blair during the Iraq inquiry in 2016. He said it was “the right thing to do and if Saddam had remained in power during the Arab Spring he would have crushed the rebels”. [43] By this kind of speculation, countries were destroyed, thousands of people were displaced and national assets were stolen. As a result of the NATO militarily intervention in Libya, Qaddafi, his sons and thousands of Libyan people were killed and millions more were displaced.
Six years on and the political settlement in Libya is far distant from being realised soon. With a glance, Libyan militias are fighting each other as well as Western countries military forces who are siding with different militias. France remains involved militarily and lost three soldiers in Benghazi in July 2016 by groups that were supporting the 2011 uprising. France then called the uprising a revolution that France ought to support and if its belief was true why is the war continuing today? And why 700 people mainly army officers assassinated? Why were the American Consulate Staff killed in Benghazi? Why the West ignoring is IS barbaric acts of cutting people’s throats in Sirte, Misratah and Dernah?
The answer to the later question is clear, those criminals were supported by the West in 2011 because they were fighting the apostate Libyan government as they claimed. Why was IS wearing the same Libyan soldiers uniform that was imported to the Libyan army in 2012, and who gives it to them? Why did IS’ members receive a salary from the Libyan Defence Ministry? The answer to the above question is that search for the effective ruler of Libya namely Belhadj, Al-Shareef, the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group and their co-ruler, the National Congress members. Who governs Libya today is well known by Libyan people and by some international NGOs groups. Thus far, Libya today is under the rule of the Islamic Jihadist groups and the West is supporting them despite these groups’ crimes against Libya and its people.
At this moment of time, is it strange that the Western countries as far north as Norway and Canada and to the south, Malta and Italy, not to mention the Qatari forces, the United Arab Emirates, Jordan, Sudan and Morocco all assembled to launch a military aggression against civilians who were not being hostile against these countries, such as, Saif al-Arab Muammar Qaddafi and Khuwaylidi family and 84 of innocent victims of Madjer? While these countries are patient and tolerant towards the supports of IS in Sirte, Misrata and Benghazi, they were also celebrating the IS bombings of the French and Belgium cities. Yet, the NATO countries and their allies should attack and bomb them as they did in Libya in 2011.
Finally, in complement of its series of crimes against the Libyans, the Western countries have appointed a war criminal who was responsible for the destruction of Bani Walid and killing of its children, “Abdul-Rahman Al-Swehli” as a head of Libya’s highest authority, the State Council and appointed his nephew, “Ahmed Maiteeq” [44] Vice President, his niece “Nihad Meitiq” [45] General Director of the Foreign and his brother in law, Faiez Al-Saraj, head of the presidential Council. In addition, Al-Swehli struck a deal with Belhadj, commander of the Islamic Fighting Group, to take the Islamist share of the presidential election. However, it is well known in Libya that if elections were to be held today, the above-mentioned persons will not guarantee and secure even their family members’ vote. Belhadj popularity was demonstrated in the parliamentary elections where he got only 50 votes in the Sauaq Al-Joumah district, which has a population of 250 thousand people.
Meanwhile and during writing these lines, the cities of Libya and its population including the capital city Tripoli where a third of Libyan population are inhabited, are suffering water shortages, living in darkness because of power cuts, lacking medical facilities and basic human needs. Per the UN, 65% of hospitals stopped working. [46] Whereas the Libyan Dinar lost 300% of its value and oil production fell from 1.9 million barrels a day into 250.000 barrels. [47] To add to the suffering of Libyan people, main roads were cut due to the military operations and act of banditry by the criminal gangs, in addition to the military operations and bombing campaign that stretches from Derna in the east to Sirte to the West through Benghazi and Ajdabiya. The most dominant in the daily news are kidnapping for ransom and booming arms trade to the extent that it is sold through the Internet and advertised on Facebook.
In conclusion, we ought to thank our brothers in Qatar and the UAE, Sudan, Tunisia, the Arab League, the NATO countries, the European Union and the people who helped Libya become a failed state. After the release of Islamist political prisoners and others, Libya became a home for the largest private prisons run by families and militias. Also, a country attracted investors from around the world to a state exporting migrants including its own citizens, 55% of its population migrated and took refugee worldwide. A state that combined the finest legal and constitution experts in the world, that were able to forge a new and modern constitution, now transformed to a state governed by 1500 militias. And finally, a state where a crime of theft was considered strange and unusual, to a state where human mutilated bodies and decomposed bodies were dumped on the streets and road sides, which became a routine and normal across the country every morning.
The Herland Report comments:
Saif Al-Islam Qaddafi and the ICC case
Before the uprising, Saif Al-Islam was the architect of the new Libya. He presented his new vision of Libya free of political prisons, committed to human rights charter, distribution of wealth, prosperity and democracy. [48] He embarked on political and economic reforms in Libya whereby the radical Islamic prisoners gained their freedom, rehabilitated and engaged in the Libyan society. Once the violent uprising erupted in some Libyan cities, local sources confirm that he offered his help by engaging in human relief efforts to help the displaced people around the country, released the uprising prisoners, securing the Misratah people who caught on the cross fire and sheltered the Benghazi people who fled the fighting areas.
He also called and supported the peace efforts to solve the Libyan civil war. According to sources on the ground, he asked the University of Sirte’s administration to print 5000 leaflets and distributed to the peaceful convoy to Benghazi contained observing human rights, calling for the army to uphold the rule of engagement and prohibiting the use of force against the protesters. The later was stated by the Head of the Joint Operation Chamber in the 2011 Libyan war, Marchal Al-Hadi Embarrish, who was taken as a prisoner of war by the Al-Zintan militias, badly treated and deprived from medical treatment until he died of cancer in prison in 2014. [49]
Despite Saif Al-Islam Qaddafi’s tireless peace efforts, NATO aircrafts targeted him in an attempt to assassinate him that resulted in a permanent disability and killing of 29 of his comrades. [50] Also, he lost his fingers and suffered multiple injuries. Yet, the ICC did not investigate the airstrike, nor oversee his five years of solitary confinement condition and his human rights generally. [51] Furthermore, the ICC persisted demanding his arrest and trial despite he was sentenced to death by a Libyan court that set-in Al-Hadbah prison under Khaled Al-Shareef, the right man of Belhaj.
For these reasons, the unfair trail and dismissal of the case is the only outcome that should be endorsed. Indeed, it could be argued that the case should be completely dropped especially after the Attorney General assassination in Benghazi and fleeing most Public Prosecution team as they faced an immense pressure from the militias. With all these circumstances, the ICC arguments were that his death sentence has not been implemented and therefore he should be arrested and jailed in Al-Hadhaba prison.
However, his death sentence was appealed by the Libyan Ministry of Justice on the ground of unfair trial since the court was set in a prison controlled by the Al-Shareef who has power over the court and the judges. Nevertheless, the ICC continued calling for his retrial and turned a blind eye on the fact that Saif Al-Islam was in the Al-Zintan prison and the Tripoli court had tried him via close circuit TV. Therefore, the ICC should respect the Libyan law and be aware that a person should not be tried twice for one alleged crime. But the end game for the West and ICC is to get rid of Saif Al-Islam Qaddafi as they did with his father Qaddafi and his brothers.
It is time for the ICC to drop its double standards and side with the Libyan people in their ultimate aim that to salvage their country from these militias and build a new Libya where human rights, prosperity, development and rule of law prevails. We also call upon the ICC to drop its call for Saif Al-Islam to be extradited and tried by the ICC.
Instead, the ICC should recognise and respect the Libyan Ministry of Justice General Amnesty Law by which Saif Al-Islam Qaddafi should assume his role in the struggle for a new democratic Libya. In this respect and after the Western countries began to see their mistake, they should work with the sincere Libyans and NGOs to bring these militias and their leaders to justice for the sake of peace and reconciliation.
[4] file:///C:/Users/Doaa/Downloads/2.%09https://www.theguardian.com/world/2… THE GUARDIAN REPORT ON THE ACTUAL NUMBER OF DEATHS IN THE 2011 WAR AMNESTY REPORT
[10] file:///C:/Users/Doaa/Desktop/New%20folder/8%20https://www.hrw.org/news/2011/08/01… CRIMINAL JUSTICE COURT REPORT ON MUAMMAR QADDAFI, SAFI AL ISLAM AND ABDULLAH AL SANUSSI
An important and pertinent article appeared in NEWSMAX yesterday, Friday September 29th, about a former CIA Station Chief’s theories as regards ISIS’s new strategy in the region and one particular point he made of interest in that article resonated with us in particular, as we have been predicting the same eventuality for months.
In the well written article about, Daniel Hoffman a distinguished former CIA Station Chief who spoke of ISIS’s regrouping objectives now they are losing ground.
Hoffman served in various counties notably Russia, Iraq, and Pakistan, specifically stated that the Head of ISIS, Abu Bakr al Baghdadi has essentially decided that ISIS’s only future is to be based in Libya, and that he himself Baghdadi should physical be there to to provide the morale and psychological support to their so called dream of a Caliphate. A new political religious dominated country called The Islamic State to be made up from amongst the countries they have and will in future try to destroy.
Many other good points were made in that article but it is this face that ISIS have decided to move operations from Iraq and Syria to Libya that make a game changer for the War on Terror.
As ISIS continue to lose in Syria and Iraq, they need a ‘new home’ -and they found it and are going there we fear in their thousands. And It’s Libya.
Here is some evidence to back our theory that supports Dennis Hoffman’s assertion. In the past few weeks, little has appeared in the media of the increased intensity in the fighting in Sabratha. The reports that do appear attribute these skirmishes to elements paid secretly by Italian Government to local Sabratha militias fighting ‘people smugglers’ to stop the flow of migrants particularly from Zuwara to Italy. A strategy solely Italy is committed to.
However what the main stream Media fail to write about are the true reasons for the intensity in fighting in and around Sabratha and Sirte.
Thousands is of ISIS fighters have recently arrived in Libya from Iraq and Syria, where they have had to flee. This is due mostly to Russian bombing of ISIS positions in those two countries, where ISIS are clearly now losing – and the logistical and medical provided covertly from Turkey. Their embarkation for Turkey’s two way traffic is the airport at the city of Misrata, a mid point between Sirte and Sabratha. The areas these ISIS retreaters are heading to are in and around two critical military strategic places for ISIS, Sirte and Sabratha.
It enables them to open new fronts and reprioritise their strategy.
Why is because it gives them striking distance from Sirte to the oil terminals of the crescent and as far as Sabratha is concerned, ISIS have plans to start launching attacks on Tunisia and later Algeria and Morocco . This is in part because many of the returning ISIS fighters are originally from Tunisia and it seems their idea is to bring turmoil to their country of origin as well as to Libya, so they need a base to operate such activities from. Then to expand into other North African countries.
This is the new ISIS strategy, make no mistake.
As far as the Sabratha region is concerned, new ISIS attacks have been fiercely defended by the Libyan Anti-ISIS Operations Room (AIOR).
A side issue and worry for Sabratha, especially for UNESCO, is further potential damage to the hitherto well preserved Roman ruins dating back thousands of years of the ancient Roman city of Sabratha.
Sabratha Amphitheatre (Photo Courtesy of AIOR)
There was for the first time shelling last week by ISIS of the famous Amphitheatre and UNESCO has called for an end to attacks on this major heritage site. The beginning of a replay of what ISIS did to Palmyra in Syria where they destroyed thousands of years of irreplaceable historic statues and monuments dating back to the Bronze Age.
A 65 year old British old hand, also an old family friend and reliable source, who was in Sabratha recently, a MENA political analyst, Richard Galustian, an expert on the region, said “Reporting from Libya generally and specifically from Sabratha seems to have understated the fact of a new influx of ISIS fighters who have retreated from Syria and Iraq” adding “the Press only seem to want to write about attributing the blame on increased fighting in Libya on the Italian Government for fueling the fighting for their own objectives” Galustian further states “to be specific its because they, the Italians, pay certain militias to fight people smugglers, but that is the lessor of the problem; its these new ISIS fighters coming into Libya in their thousands that is the real problem”.
The Italian Government has gone out of its way to explain the situation to Field Marshall Haftar, who visited Rome earlier this week to discuss these issues. They also asked him it is reported to stand down his military position in order to stand as a civilian in new Presendential elections. This would be a huge tactical error.
Haftar left Rome to Paris on Thirsday to explain all to his friends in France given the publicly displayed tensions between Paris and Rome over Libya.
Unconfirmed reports also have suggested that the Italians appealed to Haftar in the short term to send Zintani based troops loyal to him based relatively close to Zawia ports, to help destroy ISIS in the Sabratha region and also in Zawia itself and other other parts of Western Tripoli, to also help stop immigrants and secure it’s important oil facilities at Melitia. These being Italy’s prime two concerns.
In conclusion what now is critical is for America both militarily and politically to become more engaged with Libya, and more than that, to announce to the World a clear and decisive Libya policy particularly now ISIS have shifted their Interests to that country.
Authors:
Christopher Nixon Cox is a lawyer who is the grandson of the 37th President of the United States, Richard Nixon. & Phillip Escaravage is a Libya analyst and son-in-law of Christopher ‘Kip’ Forbes who is the Vice Chairman of Forbes Media.
المقر الرئيسي الجديد لداعش هو ليبيا
المؤلفو
كريستوفر نيكسون كوكس هو حفيد الرئيس ال 37 للولايات المتحدة، ريتشارد نيكسون.
فيليب إسكارافاج هو محلل ليبيا. وهو صهر كريستوفر كيب فوربس الذي هو نائب رئيس مجلس إدارة فوربس ميديا.
INTERPRETED AND TRANSLATED BY ASHRAF ABDUL WAHAB
الأحد أكتوبر 1، 2017
صورة حديثة لزعيم تنظيم داعش، أبو بكر البغدادي
ظهرت مقالة هامة وذات صلة في نيوزماكس أمس الجمعة 29 سبتمبر حول الرئيس السابق لجهاز المخابرات المركزية فيما يتعلق باستراتيجية داعش الجديدة في المنطقة و اهتم بنقطة محددة في تلك المقالة و التي لاقت صدى عندنا حيث كنا نتوقع نفس الاحتمال منذ عدة اشهر
في مقال مكتوب بشكل جيد عن دانيال هوفمان رئيس جهاز المخابرات الأمريكية المركزية السابق الذي تحدث عن أهداف إعادة تنظيم داعش , حيث يسجلون تراجعا و يفقدون مواقعهم.
خدم هوفمان في العديد من المقاطعات وخاصة روسيا والعراق وباكستان، وذكر على وجه التحديد أن رئيس داعش، وأبو بكر البغدادي قرر أساسا أن مستقبل داعش الوحيد هو أن يكون مقرها في ليبيا، وأنه هو نفسه البغدادي يجب أن تكون المادية هناك إلى وتوفير الروح المعنوية والدعم النفسي لما يسمى حلم الخلافة. وهناك بلد سياسي جديد يهيمن عليه الدين ويطلق عليه اسم “الدولة الإسلامية” التي ستشكل من بين الدول التي ستحاول تدميرها في المستقبل
وقد تم طرح العديد من النقاط الأخرى الجيدة في تلك المقالة، لكن هذا هو السبب في أن داعش قررت نقل العمليات من العراق وسوريا إلى ليبيا مما يحدث تغيير في عملية الحرب على الإرهاب.
ومع استمرار خسائر داعش في سوريا والعراق، فإنهم يحتاجون إلى “منزل جديد”، وقد وجدوا منزلهم هذا في ليبيا و نحن نخشى ذهابهم بالآلاف الى هناك.
وهنا بعض الأدلة التي تدعم تأكيد دينيس هوفمان. ففي الأسابيع القليلة الماضية، ظهر القليل في وسائل الإعلام حول زيادة حدة القتال في صبراتة و تظهر التقارير التي تصف هذه المناوشات على انها لعناصر ميليشيات صبراتة المحلية و التي دفعت لها الحكومة الإيطالية سرا حتى تقاتل “المهربين” لوقف تدفق المهاجرين، ولا سيما من زوارة إلى إيطاليا. هذه إستراتيجية تلتزم بها إيطاليا وحدها.
ومع ذلك ما هو الإتجاه الرئيسي وسائل الإعلام تفشل في الكتابة عن ماهية الأسباب الحقيقية لشدة القتال في وحول صبراتة وسرت.
الآلاف من مقاتلي داعش وصلوا مؤخرا إلى ليبيا من العراق وسوريا، حيث اضطروا للفرار. ويرجع ذلك في الغالب إلى القصف الروسي على مواقع داعش في هذين البلدين، حيث من الواضح أن داعش قد خسر الآن – كما أن الدعم اللوجيستى و الطبي قدم سرا من تركيا. إن حركة مرورهم هي من تركيا و منها لمطار مدينة مصراتة، وهي نقطة وسط بين سرت وصبراتة. المناطق التي يتجه إليها معتدي داعش في داخل وحول موقعين استراتيجيين عسكريين حاسمين لتنظيم داعش وسرت وصبراتة.
فهي تمكنها من فتح جبهات جديدة وإعادة ترتيب أولويات استراتيجيتها.
و لماذا ذلك٫ لأنها تعطيهم مسافة قصيرة من سرت إلى حقول النفط في الهلال النفطي وفيما يتعلق بصبراتة، فإن داعش لديها خطط لبدء شن هجمات على تونس ثم الجزائر والمغرب. ويرجع ذلك جزئيا إلى أن العديد من مقاتلي داعش العائدين هم أصلا من تونس، ويبدو أن فكرتهم هي جلب الاضطرابات إلى بلدهم الأصلي وكذلك إلى ليبيا، ولذلك فهم بحاجة إلى قاعدة لتشغيل مثل هذه الأنشطة. ثم للتوسع في بلدان شمال أفريقيا الأخرى.
هذه هي استراتيجية داعش الجديدة، لا تخطئ.
أما فيما يتعلق بمدينة صبراتة، فقد تم الدفاع و بشدة عن هجمات داعش الجديدة من قبل غرفة العمليات الليبية المناهضة لتنظيم داعش.
وهناك قضية جانبية وقلق حول صبراتة، وخاصة بالنسبة لليونسكو و هو حدوث المزيد من الأضرار المحتملة للآثار الرومانية المحفوظة حتى الآن التي يرجع تاريخها إلى آلاف السنين في مدينة صبراتة الرومانية القديمة.
كان هناك للمرة الأولى قصف بالمدفعية في الأسبوع الماضي من قبل داعش، ودعت اليونسكو إلى وضع حد للهجمات على هذا الموقع الهام للتراث. و هذا بداية إعادة ما قام به داعش في تدمر في سوريا حيث دمروا آلاف السنين من التماثيل التاريخية التي لا يمكن تعويضها والمعالم الأثرية التي يعود تاريخها إلى العصر البرونزي
وقال ريتشارد غالوستيان، المحلل السياسي البريطاني لمنطقة الشرق الأوسط وشمال أفريقيا وخبير في المنطقة، ، “مؤخرا يبدو أن التقارير من ليبيا عموما، وتحديدا من صبراتة، قد قللت من حقيقة التدفق الجديد لمقاتلي داعش الذين تراجعوا من سوريا والعراق “مضيفا” ان الصحافة لا تريد الا ان تكتب عن إلقاء اللوم علي الحكومة الإيطالية كسبب في تزايد القتال في ليبيا و ذلك من اجل تغذية القتال لتحقيق اهدافها “. كما ذكر غلوستيان “يجب تحديد أن الإيطاليون، يدفعون ببعض الميليشيات لمحاربة مهربين، ولكن هذا هو الجزء الصغير من المشكلة أما المشكلة الحقيقة فهي في مقاتلي داعش الجدد الذين يأتون إلى ليبيا بالآلاف “.
وقد قامت الحكومة الإيطالية بطريقتها في شرح الوضع إلى الجنرال حفتر الذي زار روما في وقت سابق من هذا الأسبوع لمناقشة هذه القضايا. وسألوه أيضا عما يقال من إنه سوف يتخلي عن منصبه العسكري لكي يقف كمدني في الإنتخابات الرئاسية الجديدة. سيكون هذا خطأ تكتيكي كبير ..
و قد غادر حفتر روما الى باريس يوم الخميس لشرح كل المجريات لأصدقائه فى فرنسا نظرا للتوترات التى ظهرت علنا بين باريس و روما حول ليبيا.
وتشير تقارير غير مؤكدة أيضا إلى أن الإيطاليين ناشدوا حفتر علي ان يتم إرسال قوات من الزنتان الموالية له و مقرها قريب نسبيا من موانئ الزاوية للمساعدة في تدمير داعش في منطقة صبراتة وأيضا في الزاوية نفسها وأجزاء أخرى من طرابلس الغربية، للمساعدة في وقف المهاجرين وتأمين مرافق النفط الهامة في مليتا. هذه هي المخاوف الرئيسية لإيطاليا.
في الختام، ما هو أمر حاسم الآن بالنسبة لأميركا سياسيا وعسكريا على حد سواء هو أن تصبح أكثر انخراطا مع ليبيا، وأكثر من ذلك، أن تعلن للعالم سياسة واضحة وحاسمة في ليبيا خاصة وأن
المؤلفون
كريستوفر نيكسون كوكس هو حفيد الرئيس ال 37 للولايات المتحدة، ريتشارد نيكسون.
فيليب إسكارافاج هو محلل ليبيا. وهو صهر كريستوفر كيب فوربس الذي هو نائب رئيس مجلس إدارة فوربس ميديا.
Boris Johnson has said Libyan city Sirte could be the new Dubai, adding, “all they have to do is clear the dead bodies away”.
The foreign secretary’s comments at a Conservative conference fringe meeting have sparked anger, with Labour calling them “crass, callous and cruel”.
Conservative MP Heidi Allen said he should be sacked, as did the Lib Dems.
Mr Johnson was making a point about the need for optimism in Libya, after a recent visit to the country.
“I look at Libya, it’s an incredible country,” he told the meeting.
“Bone-white sands, beautiful sea, Caesar’s Palace, obviously, you know, the real one.
“Incredible place. It’s got a real potential and brilliant young people who want to do all sorts of tech.
“There’s a group of UK business people, actually, some wonderful guys who want to invest in Sirte on the coast, near where Gaddafi was captured and executed as some of you may have seen.
“They have got a brilliant vision to turn Sirte into the next Dubai.
“The only thing they have got to do is clear the dead bodies away,” he said, before laughing.
The host of the conference fringe event, Legatum Institute chief executive Baroness Stroud, stepped in to say “next question”, as the foreign secretary continued to speak.
Image copyrightReutersImage caption Forces loyal to Libya’s UN-backed government managed to oust IS fighters from Sirte, the birthplace of former leader Muammar Gaddafi
Reacting on Twitter, Ms Allen said: “100% unacceptable from anyone, let alone foreign sec. Boris must be sacked for this. He does not represent my party.”
Labour’s shadow foreign secretary, Emily Thornberry, said: “It is less than a year since Sirte was finally captured from Daesh by the Libyan Government of National Accord, a battle in which hundreds of government soldiers were killed and thousands of civilians were caught in the crossfire, the second time in five years that the city had seen massive loss of life as a result of the Libyan civil war.
“For Boris Johnson to treat those deaths as a joke – a mere inconvenience before UK business people can turn the city into a beach resort – is unbelievably crass, callous and cruel.
“If these words came from the business people themselves, it would be considered offensive enough, but for them to come from the foreign secretary is simply a disgrace.
“There comes a time when the buffoonery needs to stop, because if Boris Johnson thinks the bodies of those brave government soldiers and innocent civilians killed in Sirte are a suitable subject for throwaway humour, he does not belong in the office of foreign secretary.”
Lib Dem deputy leader Jo Swinson said the “unbelievably crass and insensitive comment” was further proof Mr Johnson was “not up” to a job for which diplomacy was “a basic requirement”.
She added: “May needs to get her house in order and sack him.”
Under Qaddafi’s rule, Libya attained the highest standard of living in Africa, it was the only debt free country in Africa, He raised the literacy rate from 20% to 83%, he built one of the finest free health care systems in the third world, therefore raising the life expectancy from 44 to 75 years, Qaddafi gave women full access to education and employment and enabled the women to serve in the armed forces. Gaddafi provided to its citizens what is denied to many Americans or Europeans, free public health care, free education don’t believe me? Check out the WHO and UNESCO DATA, Nelson Mandela called Muammar Qaddafi one of the 21st century’s greatest freedom fighters, the foreign powers conspired to murder Qaddafi, he was targeted by the CIA, France and UK since the 1970s.
He was an enemy of the Dajjal System, an influencial enemy and had to be taken out. 2011 uprising was initiated and supported by Saudi Arabia, UAE and Qatar, may Allah trap the leaders of those countries with the storm of Aad, curse be upon them for betraying the ummah. But why did those countries betray Gaddafi? Qaddafi supported feverishly the Palestinian cause.
Qaddafi hated all monarchs of the Gulfs, accusing them of being puppet and slaves to the west. Qaddafi supported anti-Zionist, pan-Africanist, and black civil rights movements. Qaddafi put up a communications satellite the first in Africa to bring the continent of Africa into the 21st century of technology. Gaddafi wanted to free Africans from the imperialism and the neocolonialism.
Featured image: Ephraim Benjamin, a Mossad agent [masralarabia]
Libyan security forces have arrested a Mossad agent who held a leading position in Daesh in the north-eastern Libyan city of Benghazi, the Israeli website Inian Merkazi reported.
The Hebrew website whose name translates to “Central Issues”, added that Ephraim Benjamin is a Jewish spy and that he mingled with Libyans following the 2011 revolution that resulted in the ouster of former dictator Moammer Ghaddafi.
Masr Alarabia website described him as one of Mossad’s “Arabists” who are characterised by Arab features and who speak Arabic fluently in local dialects
Israeli Arabists are known for infiltrating Palestinian protests and arresting demonstrators, as well as assassinating anti-occupation Palestinian activists, according to Masr Alarabia.
Benjamin had reportedly become a prominent imam of a large mosque in Benghazi, Libya’s second largest city, then he became a Daesh leader who commanded 200 fighters from the militant group.
The spy, who was known in Libya as Abu Hafs, was arrested two months ago and accused by the Libyan authorities of gathering intelligence information on Daesh for Mossad.
The Israeli website cited the incident as evidence used by Arab media to justify the common conspiratorial argument propagated in some Arab circles about Israel being behind the rise of Daesh in the region.
Libyan media outlets describe Benjamin as the “Mossad sheikh” who was arrested by local authorities.
Daesh began to operate in Libya in 2015. Many believe that the video posted by the group on 12 February of the same year from the city of Sirte, featuring the beheading of 21 Egyptian Coptic Christians, as the official announcement of the militant group’s emergence in the north African country even if militant operations were believed to have been committed by Daesh prior to that date.
Professor Novak Vukoje is a world renowned physician specialising in sleep disorders including apnea and snoring. In his native Serbia, his practice in Belgrade offers corrective surgery to patients from around the world as well as treatments to improve the health and lifestyle of those in need.
While Dr. Vukoje continues to practice medicine, many of his patients may be unaware that he once treated Libya’s revolutionary leader Muammar Gaddafi. Dr. Vukoje recently spoke with Sputnik in Serbia and recalled his memories of Libya before it descended into the hell of civil war and constant terror.
“I am proud that I had the opportunity to get to know him. For the first time we talked in his tent in 2006. He then invited the national television to film our conversation. But no one feels careless before a surgical operation and he (Gaddafi) confessed: ‘The whole of Libya stands in awe of me, and I am in awe of the Serbian surgeon”.
He continued,
“I spent quite a lot of time with him(Gaddafi)… and in general, I would like to say that during Gaddafi’s reign the life in Libya was very good. I traveled across world, but Libya was the only country where I did not see beggars on the streets. The state authorities helped everyone to live decently.
It is like the domino effect: you find three dissatisfied people, then you find three more, and then three more again. This is how this unfortunate war began, and you see how it ended. A general who drove me there says that people simply have nothing to eat, no water, no gasoline. This is a nightmare”.
During the time of Gaddafi’s Great Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Libya was the wealthiest African nation. Public services including utilities were free as was healthcare and education. For those who required to study aboard, the government paid for the expenses of higher education and foreign universities and those who could not immediately obtain employment were paid their nominal salary until such a time they could find employment.
Housing was considered a right and overtime, Libya went from one of the poorest countries of the region to one where immense wealth from the energy sector was widely distributed to a population which became accustomed to high living standards.
One of Gaddafi’s most ambitious projects was the ‘Man Made River’ which brought fresh water and irrigation to the vast Libyan desert.
Today, Libya stands divided between multiple governments which are all vying for legitimacy. All of this is happening against a backdrop of terrorists who control a great deal of Libyan territory and amid a total collapse of Libya’s once cutting edge infrastructure
Libya today genocide under the new authorities (tha machachia massacre 06-2012)
Libya today the latest and the most heinous crimes of torture under the new Libyan authorities
Continued update all crimes in 2014 under the new Libyan authorities
In the below video its taken at the destruction of the international airport in 2014 by the Mizratans and the aftermath
Libya today the most heinous crimes against women under the new Libyan authorities
A summary of what’s going on FROM OCTOBER 2011 TILL TODAY IN THE NEW FREE LIBYA OF ALQAEDA/ISIS/LIFG/UN BACKED GOVERNMENT/GNC/NATO
The tears on my face have left the scars, suddenly I feel very old and tired. I talk to people all around Europe and the United States and from what I understand they have no clue of why the war happened in Libya and some who know they have no idea that the war hasn’t finished. I believed I could not be anymore surprised by the un-awareness of the people I come in contact but also by their attitude of “Shit happens” or they would say “why are you complaining isn’t it enough we freed you from a dictator?” I think to myself here we go again I have to explain to these brainwashed people how Libya was before the war and then after the war which hasn’t stopped. Today that I am writing the capital is still captive under the Misurata Militia the kidnapping is still on, the killing nothing is sacred, women are harassed there is no law. The UN backed government and the GNC is RULED BY THE MILITIA AND THE GOVERNOR BELHAJ THE MOST WANTED TERRORIST IN THE WORLD…. IS BEING GROOMED TO BECOME THE NEW LEADER OF LIBYA. BelHaj on his own has countless rapes, killings and tortures of Libyans. He is responsible for the train station in Spain, the American embassy in Sudan, was in bed with BinLaden is an asset to CIA/MI6/MOSSAD and the favourite of Qatar. His on speed dial with McCane and other scums who have looted Libya this man owned only a house in Libya in 2011 and now his a multi billionaire.
Many of our children have been kidnapped and sold outside Libya, our women have been kidnapped raped and then sold this is the FREE LIBYA THAT NATO/USA/ISRAEL wanted to install WESTERN DEMOCRACY when we already had democracy of the people.
I DO NOT APOLOGISE FOR THE HORROR THAT YOU WILL SEE BECAUSE I LIVED IT WHILE YOU WILL BE WATCHING THESE VIDEOS FROM THE COMFORT OF YOUR HOME AND YOU CAN STOP IT WHEN YOU CANNOT WATCH ANYMORE WHILE I WAS FORCED TO LIVE IT FOR SIX YEARS AND I DO NOT SEE A LIGHT OF HOPE AT THE END OF THE TUNNEL.
NOW ITS YOUR RESPONSIBILITY TO WAKE UP AND TAKE ACTION, IF YOU DON’T YOU WILL BE THE SAME COMPLICIT AS YOUR GOVERNMENT AND HAVE BLOOD IN YOUR HANDS. WHAT YOU SEE HERE ITS HAPPENING IN SYRIA, IRAQ AND NOW YEMEN….. HOW MUCH MORE DOES THE MIDDLE EAST AND NORTH AFRICA HAS TO SUFFER FOR ISRAEL TO GET THE LANDS THAT SHE BELIEVES GOD HAS PROMISED HER? HOW LONG DO YOU HAVE TO SUFFER BY PAYING TAXES FOR ISRAEL TO KEEP THE WARS GOING ON? WHAT DO WE HAVE TO DO TO MAKE YOU WAKE UP AND TAKE ACTION? NOT FOR ME BUT FOR HUMANITY?
The Neocons and AIPAC treat us all, including the Libyan people, as subjects or sub-humans. You can say that this is the premise upon which they build their entire ideology. The Neocons used America to dispose Gaddafi because they thought that he was basically challenging the Neocon hegemony in Libya.
Mariam Alfatah graduated from the London School of Economics. She is a Libyan and has witnessed how the Powers That Be and their marionettes obliterated her country. You may disagree with just about everything Alfatah is going to say, but try to understand some of the arguments and evidence that she is going to put forth and interact with them responsibly.
We agree that ideas should be proved or disproved by reason and logic, not by emotion or name calling. If what she is saying lacks logical consistency, explanatory power, explanatory scope, and historical context, then readers are welcome to provide serious evidence to the contrary. The interview is a little long largely because Alfatah had to explain a number of issues and present evidence to support her claims.
Jonas E. Alexis: You said that there was a “Holocaust” and “a genocide” in Libya in 2011. Virtually everyone knew that the invasion was a Neocon war.[1] In fact, long before the war got started, thirty-seven Neocons sent Obama a letter saying that Gaddafi must go.[2] Neocon talking-head Bill Kristol himself said on eve of the invasion:
“Our ‘invasions’ have in fact been liberations. We have shed blood and expended treasure in Kuwait in 1991, in the Balkans later in the 1990s, and in Afghanistan and Iraq—in our own national interest, of course, but also to protect Muslim peoples and help them free themselves. Libya will be America’s fifth war of Muslim liberation.”[3]
More importantly, virtually every serious scholar knows by now that the Neoconservative movement is a Jewish ideological enterprise which has never been good for America.[4]
Stephen Halper and Jonathan Clarke, themselves philo-Semitic scholars, declare that the Neoconservative movement is “in complete contrast…to the general cast of the American temperament as embodied by the Declaration of Independence.”[5]
Jewish legal scholar Stephen M. Feldman argues that the Neocons got their political and intellectual position “by leading an assault on the hegemonic pluralist democratic regime that had taken hold of the nations in the 1930s.”[6]
What Feldman is implicitly or reluctantly saying is that the Neocons essentially attacked the moral and political fabric of America and progressively turned the country into an empire that always looks for monsters to destroy in the Middle East and elsewhere.[7] This came into full bloom during the Reagan administration.[8]
These warmongers have told us ad nauseam that they were trying to establish “democracy” and “freedom” in places like Libya. Obviously Libya has been in chaos ever since these “geniuses” landed in the country. Describe for us why these warmongers were and still are worse than psychopaths. You can also talk about what really happened when they invaded Libya.
Mariam Alfatah: First of all, it must be stated that the Neocons and AIPAC treat us all, including the Libyan people, as subjects or sub-humans. You can say that this is the premise upon which they build their entire ideology, and I will prove that throughout this interview.
The Neocons used America to dispose Gaddafi because they thought that he was basically challenging the Neocon hegemony in Libya. This is an important point. One of the writers at VT, David Swanson, talked about this in one of his articles, which was published by the Guardian itself.[9]
Keep in mind that Libya, under Gaddafi, controlled its own oil. I agree with Swanson completely when he said that “The Libyan government controls more of its oil than any other nation on earth, and it is the type of oil that Europe finds easiest to refine. Libya also controls its own finances.”[10]
What was more interesting was that Gaddafi challenged African countries to follow his lead![11] He helped establish satellites in many African nations. Some of those nations used to get their satellites from the French, which cost them millions of dollars. Now they were getting them at a fairly reasonable price from Gaddafi. To the warmongers and psychopaths, that was a dangerous move.
There is more: Gaddafi challenged African nations to stop importing what one may call GMO food from the West. He also said that Italy should compensate the Libyan people for their colonization from 1911 until 1945. Finally, Gaddafi had a plan to transform Libya into a second Dubai, where tourists would flock there by the millions. In his view, this would have created a shining monument for all of Africa. So, if you peel back the ideological onion, you can easily see why Gaddafi was a target.
There was no way for Gaddafi to survive the Neocon onslaught without serious backup from other countries. The Neocon system in the West, particularly in America, certainly didn’t want to stop their aggressive expansion in Libya and indeed in Africa. Therefore they had to summon pathetic lies and use false pretexts to invade Libya in 2011. Since the fall of the Jamahiriya, Libya has not experienced any political, financial or even social stability. None at all. Practically overnight, Libya was transformed from one of the richest growing countries in the world when it comes to oil and other resources to a failed state.
After the invasion, the West put “Abdulhakim Belhaj” in charge, one of the most wanted terrorists in the world. If you don’t believe me, you can even go to Wikipedia and it will tell you a little bit about Belhaj. He joined the Taliban and was even associated with al-Qaeda. The Gaddafi government warned the West about Belhaj right after the 9/11 attack. That was back in 2002.
The Gaddafi government even presented strong evidence which suggested that Belhaj was a terrorist and was advancing his ideology and covert activity at an alarming rate. Once again, even Zionist media like the BBC would agree with what I’m saying here. The BBC fairly reported in 2011 that Belhaj was in “Jalalabad, Afghanistan, from where he ran and financed training camps for Arab mujahideen fighters.”[12] We all know that the mujahideen are terrorists, even though the United States funded and trained them.[13] This is from Wikipedia—and it gets really interesting:
“Tracked by the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), after a tip-off from MI6 gained from London-based informants, Belhadj was arrested with his pregnant wife in 2004 at Kuala Lumpur International Airport, Malaysia. Transferred on the same plane to Bangkok, he was then placed in the custody of the CIA, where he was retained at a secret prison at the airport. Returned to Libya on the rendition aircraft N313P, he was held at the Abu Salim prison for seven years.”
Now this is the guy that the Neocons put in power in Libya! This is the kind of democracy and freedom that they are imposing on us Libyans. What were the results of the Libya invasion? Well, over 100,000 civilians lost their lives, including women and children.
It gets worse. At least 2 million Libyans had to move out of the country; some went to Tunis, Egypt, Algiers, and the UAE. The living conditions from 2011 till 2014 in Tripoli was tolerable but Benghazi and the eastern part of Libya became a living hell. Kidnapping, raping, and shooting were like playing video games in those regions.
The invaders even used Sarin gas in Ban Walid, but no Zionist Media covered that vital story. Sirt, a city in Libya, was invaded by ISIS, which we all know got their financial backing from the US, Qatar, Turkey, and even Israel. Al-Qaeda also took over Benghazi.
I could go on and on, but the main point here is that since the invasion in 2011, Libya has never been the same. The UN began to implement draconian ideas which the Libyan people rejected. Let me finish answering your question by saying that Gaddafi wanted to live. It is said that he told the invaders that he was willing to go into exile in the desert if they would not bomb Libya and turn the country into rubble. The response was: “We want you dead, not in exile, as we know you will fund a coup d’état. No, we will bomb Libya and rebuild it.”
In March of 2011, Qaddafi’s son, Saif, came out on national TV and very angrily said that he would find every single traitor (he called them “rats”) and killed them all. I think CNN broadcast his announcement with, of course, the usual editing to make it sound like he was ready to cause a massacre.
The assassination of US Ambassador Christopher Stevens was an inside job, an order from the American administration, carried out by ragged rebels who were trained by American agents. By the way, there were 36 CIA agents who were saved by Qaddafi’s army; even though we had lost the war we still saved the asses of the Americans; what an irony.
The next US Ambassador, Safira Deborah, did everything in her power to finance and assist the so-called “Libyan Dawn,” which was but a faction of a terrorist group known as LIFG. They were also financed by Qatar and Turkey. Deborah praised Belhaj till she had to run for her own life in July of 2014.
Deborah fled first to Tunis then later to Malta. While in Malta she did a lot of bad mistakes which probably caused her to be fired. After Deborah, the new ambassador kept quiet and didn’t show his face much. It was no coincidence that Libyan officials began to sign contracts with Israel.
_______________________________________________
Abdulhakim Belhaj
Jonas E. Alexis: Vladimir Putin has specifically condemned the United States and NATO for invading Libya. He has obviously observed that the United States has a history of using categorical lies and fabrications to invade sovereign nations in the Middle East. Do you know if Putin ever corresponded with Gaddafi?
Mariam Alfatah: In 2011 Putin was only a prime minister and Medvedev was the president of Russia. Gaddafi seemed to have spoken with Putin during a UN conference. As I understand it (from people who were in the room) Putin told Qaddafi that Russia would say NO to the “no fly zone.” I have no reason not to believe my sources.
Medvedev also seemed to have agreed with Putin. But it seemed that the elitists put an ideological spell on Medvedev and blackmailed him; so he basically ignored what was really taking place in Libya. Libyan officials knew that Medvedev wanted to be liked by the Americans. The result was total catastrophe.
Both Russia and China lost billions of dollars by not politically or militarily mobilizing against the Powers That Be; they knew from the get go that the Neocon “no fly zone” was a farce. Russia helped Libya as much as they could without breaking international rules. So, Gaddafi was in contact with Putin but how often I do not know.
Jonas E. Alexis: In your view, do you believe that the vast majority of Libyans supported Gaddafi’s leadership? For example, Assad won the Syrian election by a landslide.[14] Was that the case with Gaddafi?
Mariam Alfatah: Yes. At the time of the bombing Libya’s population was over 6.5 million, and Qaddafi had the support of 6.3 million. Even the Washington Post reluctantly admitted that “Many Libyans appear to back Gaddafi.” Take it from their own pen—and this was when the invaders were creating chaos virtually everywhere:
“But six days into the allied bombardment of Libyan military targets, it is clear that Gaddafi can count on the fierce loyalties of at least a significant segment of the population in the vast stretches that lie beyond the enclave of rebel-held territory in the east…
“Even Gaddafi’s opponents, who dare murmur their dissent only out of earshot of regime loyalists, concede that the man who has governed Libya for nearly 42 years does command genuine support.”[15]
But the Washington Post knocked itself out by saying, “That a man who boasts he lives in a tent and whom Ronald Reagan once dubbed ‘the mad dog of the Middle East’ still commands devotion four decades into his rule is one of the enduring mysteries of this idiosyncratic country.”[16]
That is really worse than stupid. How can they say this is an example of “enduring mysteries” when the vast majority of Libyans knew that Gaddafi, despite his faults, really helped the country? This is not an example of “enduring mysteries;” this is a classic example which conclusively shows that the Neocon ideology has always been in opposition to the vast majority of the people on this planet. So, people like you, Jonas, are right in calling this ideology satanic.
There was a rally in July of 2011 in Tripoli. I was there. There were also over 3 million people in Green Square! There is a video on my blog that you can access and see for yourself.
If the West had allowed Libyans to vote freely, Qaddafi would have won by a landslide like Assad. You see, if we didn’t want Gaddafi we would have removed him from power a long time ago. He would have been assassinated. You have to understand that we follow our tribe leaders.
I am sure if any of the tribe leaders didn’t want him, they would have taken him out. What’s also important about these issues is that the UN and Western allies refused to talk to those leaders! If I can use a rough analogy, it would be like the United States going to war with another country without contacting Congress.
Qaddafi had succeeded in uniting nearly all the tribes. This was almost an impossible task because you just couldn’t get those people to sit down at the same table. They sometimes fought against each other. But Gaddafi was able to unite them.
Note: It took us 3 years to get the majority of the tribe leaders in one room and to agree that we cannot leave Libya to foreigners or to installed puppets. Now do you see what the Neocons did to my country?
Jonas E. Alexis: Business Insider has been a Zionist outlet, but I think they were somewhat fair to publish your letter. I was quite surprised when they declared: “But even as Qaddafi commits atrocities, the rebels are engaged in some of the same violence. And Washington has been forced to look the other way.”[17]
In your letter, you told Business Insider that “Personally, I do not care about Qaddafi but what you are doing is wrong. You are not telling the truth. You are lying to your readers.”[18] Can you expand on that for us?
Mariam Alfatah: My political views are democratic; Qaddafi was a military leader. That is what I meant. People may think that I am an apologist for Gaddafi. That would be categorically false. Gaddafi “nationalized” my father’s business and for 10 years my father was basically out of job.
But I was also furious with NATO and the West precisely because they wanted to decide our fate. They told us ad nauseam that the Libyan invasion was a true revolution. Total nonsense. If it was a revolution, why did the terrorists and blood-thirsty animals have to get help from NATO?
We knew that there were 200,000 people who were in exile and were against Qaddafi. Most of them were religious fanatics and scumbags who stole from the Libyan people. I may not like Gaddafi but I cannot lie about what he did. He did a lot of good things. Under Gaddafi, education was free and it was obligatory that people get a decent education. In 1969, prior to the revolution, we had an 80% illiteracy rate. Under Gaddafi, that percentage dropped dramatically. Let’s not forget that though Qaddafi was brought in by the CIA, he would kick them out a few years later.
Qaddafi was no threat to Europe or America. On the contrary, he was the one keeping the refugees and “migrants” out of Europe.[19] Beginning in 1970, Libyan women started gaining their freedom. Unlike some other Arab countries, we could travel on our own, we could buy lands, etc.
Gaddafi even made a law which said that women or teenagers are not to be forced to marry anyone. Women who were forced to marry could go to the police; the police would examine the situation and, if a particular woman is found to be telling the truth, then the marriage would be rendered invalid.
Yes, we had our ups and downs, but we didn’t deserve this current chaos. We had our own kind of democracy but it was not the democracy that the war machine wanted. Ironically, we Libyans had more freedom than any American now has. The only thing we couldn’t do publicly was to criticize the Qaddafi family. But Libyans had free health care, free education, no water bills, etc.
For example, in Europe I bought a car that cost me 16,000 euros; in Libya I would have bought the same car for 8,000 euros. So, we were perfectly comfortable with not being able to criticize Qaddafi publicly precisely because we had the things we needed. Why would anyone unfairly criticize a government that puts a roof over your head? Isn’t that why the average Russian now loves Vladimir Putin? Do you think they would love to see him dead? I don’t think so!
Free speech is overrated in the West; here in Europe and in the US people talk about free speech all the time, but we all know the role that the CIA, FBI, and the NSA can play when you don’t join the party line. Look what happened to Edward Snowden and other genuine whistleblowers.
Some US spies were even saying that they would love to see Snowden’s head on a silver platter. One NSA analyst said in 2014: “In a world where I would not be restricted from killing an American, I personally would go and kill him myself. A lot of people share this sentiment.”[20] So much for “freedom of speech” in the West!
_________________________________________
Jonas E. Alexis: As already suggested, disagreement on rational ground is fair. But everyone ought to agree that Libya, like Iraq, is now run by a number of terrorist scumbags. You may say that Gaddafi was bad, and obviously he had his shortcomings, but the country was generally much better under his command. As retired US Army General Paul Vallely put it last year:
“Libya is just another one of those countries with too much interference from outside sources. In my opinion Gaddafi should have remained in power, because he was some kind of a stabilizing force. The problem today is we have these diplomats that don’t understand world affairs – they’re really not good at it. That is in many different countries. That was one of the biggest problems in Benghazi, as our State Department is getting involved in things they should not have been involved in.”[21]
You can now read the Zionist outlets and virtually every single one of them will reluctantly agree that Libya is in chaos.[22] Even CNN, of all places, said last year that
“Five short years ago, Libya was one of the wealthiest and most stable nations in Africa. The country had been led by Colonel Muammar Gadhafi for more than 40 years, since he seized power in a 1969 coup, and its six million citizens enjoyed the benefits of the country’s vast oil wealth.”[23]
But listen to how CNN actually twisted the actual facts: “After years of uncertainty and upheaval allowed ISIS militants to gain a foothold in the country, the U.S. has begun carrying out airstrikes to try and oust them.”[24] What CNN was implicitly saying was that ISIS militants were exclusively responsible for the chaos! The Neocons and warmongers could then wash their hands off.
Nonsense.
[1] See for example David Swanson, “Libya: another neocon war,” Guardian, April 21, 2011; Michael Lind, “The neocons are trying to talk us into war — again,” Salon, March 9, 2011.
[2] Jim Newell, “Neocons Write Nice Letter Asking Obama for War in Libya,” Gawker, March 15, 2011.
[3] Quoted in Howard Kurtz, “Libyan War and the Media’s Reaction,” Daily Beast, March 21, 2017.
[4] See Stefan Halper and Jonathan Clarke, America Alone: The Neo-Conservatives and the Global Order (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004); Murray Friedman,The Neoconservative Revolution: Jewish Intellectuals and the Shaping of Public Policy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005); Francis Fukuyama, “After Neoconservatism,” NY Times, February 18, 2006.
[6] Stephen M. Feldman, Neoconservative Politics and the Supreme Court: Law, Power, and Democracy (New York and London: New York University Press, 2013), 1.
[7] Patrick Buchanan has rightly criticized this version of America. Patrick J. Buchanan, A Republic, Not an Empire (WA: Regnery Publishing, 1999).
[8] See Patrick J. Buchanan, Where the Right Went Wrong: How Neoconservatives Subverted the Reagan Revolution and Hijacked the Bush Presidency (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 2004).
[9] David Swanson, “Libya: another neocon war,” Guardian, April 21, 2011.
[11] Ronald Bruce St. John argues that Gaddafi made arrangements with at least 10 African states and was asking for political and economic partnership. Many African leaders applauded him for his commitment to help the oppressed people in Africa. Ronald Bruce St. John, Libya: From Colony to Revolution (Oxford: One World, 2012), 229.
[12] See “Profile: Libyan rebel commander Abdel Hakim Belhaj,” BBC, September 5, 2011.
[13] See “Frankenstein the CIA created,” Guardian, January 17, 1999.
[14] Nabih Bulos, “Syria’s Assad wins third term as president in landslide victory,” LA Times, June 4, 2014; “Bashar al-Assad wins re-election in Syria as uprising against him rages on,” Guardian, June 4, 2014; “Bashar Assad wins Syria presidential election with 88.7% of vote,” Russia Today, June 4, 2014.
[15] Liz Sly, “Many Libyans appear to back Gaddafi,” Washington Post, March 24, 2011.
[19] Bruce St. John, Libya: From Colony to Revolution, 274.
[20] Paul Szoldra and Michael B Kelley, “Some US Spies Are Saying They Would Love To Kill Edward Snowden,” Business Insider, January 17, 2014.
[21] “‘Post-Gaddafi Libya in chaos as Plan B was missing,’” Russia Today, October 20, 2016.
[22] “Four Years After Revolution, Libya Slides Into Chaos,” National Public Radio, January 13, 2015; “Chaos in Libya,” Hoover Institution, August 20, 2014; Rajan Menon, “Libya in Chaos,” National Interest, June 27, 2012; “Libya chaos: Islamic State battles militias in Sirte,” BBC, August 11, 2015; Richard Spencer, “How Libya descended into faction-fighting and chaos,” Telegraph, November 8, 2014; Richard Spencer, “World turning blind eye to chaos in Libya, Amnesty charges,” Telegraph, October 30, 2014.
[23] Bryony Jones and Anastasia Beltyukova, “Libya’s chaos, explained in five graphics,” CNN, August 4, 2016.
The war in Libya was caused not so much by any internal dissent but rather by the West’s need for continued economic expansion, which Western elites view as part and parcel of the post-Cold War “end of history”, a still-potent messianic ideology which gives the West the license to attack anyone, anywhere, to achieve its mercantilist objectives, and which gives contains the necessary humanitarian “fig leaf” for the benefit of the politically correct faction of Western societies.
Naturally, politically correct Westerners have been unbothered by the “humanitarian interventions” invariably making the situation far worse, and Libya has not been an exception. Since the fall of the regime of Muammar al-Gaddafi, Libya has not experienced any political, financial or even social stability, as the country is witnessing a state of constant fighting between all parties despite the absence of any religious or sectarian differences between the population, where Libya turned from one of the richest countries in the world to a failed state.
Two Libyas
The current war in Libya began in 2014, with most of the fighting being between the internationally-recognized Tobruk-based Libyan Interim Government centered on the House of Representatives that was elected democratically in 2014 , an Islamist National Salvation Government government founded by the General National Congress based in Tripoli city, and the UN-backed Government of National Accord also based in Tripoli.
The Libyan Interim Government has the allegiance of the Libyan National Army under the leadership of General “Khalifa Haftar” and enjoys the support of Egypt and the United Arab Emirates directly, with indirect support from both the United States and Britain and Russia, with the latter country’s affinity to Haftar clearly demonstrated when the Libyan general boarded the Admiral Kuznetsov aircraft carrier in January 2017, as the ship was returning home from its combat mission at the coast of Syria. It is a secular entity and has the sole legitimate power in Libya. Since 2014, Egypt has supplied many light and heavy weapons to the Libyan National Army led by Khalifa Haftar, which included several MiG-21 fighters. The United Arab Emirates also provides financial support to Haftar and has a small airbase in eastern Libya, including AT-802 turboprop light attack aircraft and WingLoong UAVs which appear to be operated by Erik Prince’s Academi (formerly Blackwater) Private Military Company.
The emergence of the Libyan Interim Government was made possible by the withdrawal of House of Representatives support for the Government of National Accord, whose power has since greatly decreased.
Instead, the chief opponent of the LIG is the Islamic government of the General National Congress, also called the “Salvation Government”, which is led by the Muslim Brotherhood with support from a coalition of Islamic groups known as “Dawn of Libya”. It is believed that one of the combat groups of the General National Congress was involved in the assassination of US Ambassador Christopher Stevens in 2012. The Muslim Brotherhood are also accused of providing political cover to ISIS during its expansion in Libya before 2014, which is a plausible accusation considering Qatar’s tangible support to both ISIS and the Muslim Brotherhood.
It too enjoys international support by Qatar, Turkey, and Sudan, with the former two countries playing roles identical to they played in the Syrian conflict. Qatar’s considerable contribution included financial support to the General National Congress and smuggling arms using C-130 military cargo planes in cooperation with Sudan, while Turkey has smuggled arms to the “Dawn of Libya” using ships. Turkey also benefits from illegal oil trade with the militia, according to unconfirmed reports.
Since 2014, ISIS has had strong influence in much of Libya, especially in Darnah east of Banghazi, but this influence of the terrorist organization has shrunk over time. However, Libya is one of the bases of recruitment and money laundering for ISIS, where ISIS is believed to has received indirect support from Turkey, Qatar and the General National Congress. Moreover, ISIS views Libya as an operating base from which to stage expansion into countries of the Sahel and to aid ISIS cells operating in Tunisia and Egypt.
Completing the list of warring parties, Tuareg forces control southwestern Libya, including Amazigh and Ghat area, and are considered indirect allies of the General National Congress.
The Qatar-Turkey “Axis”
Given the balance of forces outlined above, the conflict in Libya would have come to a close years ago had it not been for the direct involvement of the Qatar-Turkey alliance, whose aggressive acts against Syria had likewise escalated that conflict. To be sure, the Qatar-Turkey alliance was one of convenience, with the two parties pursuing different objectives which simply happened to be not mutually exclusive.
For Turkey, the aim of the game at the time was neo-Ottomanism. Both Syria and Libya are, after all, parts of the former Ottoman Empire, with the former being wrested from its grasp by the French and the British at the end of World War I, and the former falling to Italy in Italo-Turkish War of 1911-1912. For Qatar, the objective was establishing oneself as a regional power player not only independent of Saudi Arabia but also equivalent to it, a task that would have been greatly facilitated by establishing Qatar-friendly regimes in Libya and Syria, extending Qatar’s control over the region’s hydrocarbons, and gaining access to new markets in Europe. That final point of the Turkey-Qatar strategy was welcome by European factions favoring continued eastward expansion because the Qatari gas pipeline could be used as a political weapon against Russia.
The Turning Point?
However, that coalition proved too weak to overcome the resistance of legitimate government forces in Libya and Syria, particularly after the direct Russian military involvement in Syria spelled the end of the “Assad must go” campaign, and it never managed to secure the support of the United States for either of its objectives. The US, for its part, attempted to sponsor its own jihadists in Syria or favored the Saudi-led efforts. Therefore it was only a matter of time before either Turkey or Qatar realized its strategy was doomed and sought to pursue a different course of action. Turkey proved the weaker link in that coalition thanks to, ironically, US enlistment of the Kurds as its proxy army in Syria. Faced with an impossible to dislodge Russian presence in Syria, Turkey opted to change its aims to become an “energy gateway” to Europe by joining forces with Russia in the form of the Turkish Stream pipeline.
Worse, while initially the West was generally in favor of any and all forms of “Arab Spring”, including the Turkish-Qatari efforts in both Syria and Libya, by 2016 it was becoming clear the downsides were outweighing the positives. The refugee crisis, in particular, that became a potent political issue threatening the unchallenged liberal status quo had forced a re-evaluation of the policy, lest the likes of Front National or AfD come to power in Europe. Even the US, which did not receive a flood of Middle East refugees, was affected. On April 11, 2016, Obama was forced to admit that Libya was the “worst mistake” he had committed during his presidency as the mistake was that the United States did not plan for the post-Gaddafi era. He was not doing it because of any sorrow for the citizens of countries he despoiled, but rather because the resulting chaos was now negatively affecting Hillary Clinton’s chances to win.
But it was Donald Trump who delivered what surely will be a fatal blow to Qatar’s international ambitions, first by giving a green light to Saudi Arabia and the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) states to pounce on Qatar, and then directly accusing it of sponsoring terrorists. The ensuing blockade of Qatar meant that the country’s leaders would have little time or money to continue financing militants in Libya or Syria. Indeed, shortly after the Qatar blockade was imposed, the Russian military stated the war in Syria, other than the fighting against ISIS, had practically ground to a standstill.
Considering that Turkey and Qatar have been the main obstacles to ending the war in Libya, Turkey’s defection followed by the US-authorized Saudi political and economic assault on Qatar have implications not only for Syria but also for Libya. Indeed, there are already many signs the political situation in Libya is evolving. Arguably the biggest development in recent months was the release of Saif al-Islam Gaddafi, Muammar Gaddafi’s son, by a Tobruk-based militia upon a request from the House of Representatives. With Saif al-Islam Gaddafi being wanted by the International Criminal Court for alleged atrocities committed by the Libyan government during the 2011 war, the fact of his release indicates the political fortunes are now favoring the House of Representatives and Marshal Haftar, a shift also suggested by British Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson’s statements in support of Haftar playing an important role in Libyan politics and the new French President Macron’s admission the war in Libya was a major mistake.
But here the Western officials seem to be following the trends rather than making them, as the root cause of the shift appears to be the sudden weakening of Qatar’s positions in the region. Egypt is a clear beneficiary of that weakening and is intent on pressing its advantage, to the point of pro-Sisi Egyptian media actually advocating bombing of Qatar. The Qatari disarray is also made apparent by LNA’s recent announcement that the Qatari opposition has provided the LNA with a list of Libyan citizens who worked for Qatar’s intelligence services.
Honorable Peace or Humiliating Defeat?
Qatar’s situation is not an enviable one. For the time being Turkey’s military support and the US unwillingness to allow Saudi Arabia to utterly devastate Qatar are enough to allow it to maintain a brave face. But in the longer term it needs to find an accommodation with at least one of the key power players in the region, such as Saudi Arabia, US, or…Russia. The fact of growing Turkey-Russia cooperation on a variety of issues and Qatar’s outreach to Russia in the form of a foreign minister visit and the simplification of visa rules for Russian citizens, suggests that Qatar is at least contemplating realigning its alliance membership. However, considering that all of the three above-named powers are on the opposite side of the barricades as far as Libya is concerned, it seems unlikely Qatar can maintain its proxy war there even with Turkey’s support. Therefore, almost no matter what Qatar decides to do next, it will have no choice but to write off Libya as a total loss, an act that will hasten the end of this tragic six-year war.
Saif al-Islam Gaddafi, son of late Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, attends a hearing behind bars in a courtroom in Zintan May 25, 2014. REUTERS/Stringer
BEIRUT, LEBANON (8:30 P.M.) – Protesters in Bani Walid rallied on Saturday night calling for Saif al-Islam Gaddafi, a son of former Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, to lead the country.
“We call on the son of Libya Mujahid Saif al-Islam Gaddafi to lead the national movement to resolve the forms in Libya and to get Libya out from civil war,” al-Sayan tribe spokesperson Ahmad al-Shalahli said.
British-educated Saif al-Islam is a prominent member of Gaddafi’s remaining family.
After his father’s killing, he attempted to flee to Niger but was captured by a rebel group in November 2011. Saif al-Islam was released in the beginning of June, after spending five years in prison.
Despite his release, he is still on the wanted list by the International Criminal Court for alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity. His current location is unknown.
Hillary’s emails truly are the gifts that keep on giving. While France led the proponents of the UN Security Council Resolution that would create a no-fly zone in Libya, it claimed that its primary concern was the protection of Libyan civilians (considering the current state of affairs alone, one must rethink the authenticity of this concern). As many “conspiracy theorists” will claim, one of the real reasons to go to Libya was Gaddafi’s planned gold dinar.
One of the 3,000 Hillary Clinton emails released by the State Department on New Year’s Eve (where real news is sent to die quietly) has revealed evidence that NATO’s plot to overthrow Gaddafi was fueled by first their desire to quash the gold-backed African currency, and second the Libyan oil reserves.
The email in question was sent to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton by her unofficial adviser Sydney Blumenthal titled “France’s client and Qaddafi’s gold”.
The email identifies French President Nicholas Sarkozy as leading the attack on Libya with five specific purposes in mind: to obtain Libyan oil, ensure French influence in the region, increase Sarkozy’s reputation domestically, assert French military power, and to prevent Gaddafi’s influence in what is considered “Francophone Africa.”
Most astounding is the lengthy section delineating the huge threat that Gaddafi’s gold and silver reserves, estimated at “143 tons of gold, and a similar amount in silver,” posed to the French franc (CFA) circulating as a prime African currency.
This gold was accumulated prior to the current rebellion and was intended to be used to establish a pan-African currency based on the Libyan golden Dinar. This plan was designed to provide the Francophone African Countries with an alternative to the French franc (CFA).
(Source Comment: According to knowledgeable individuals this quantity of gold and silver is valued at more than $7 billion. French intelligence officers discovered this plan shortly after the current rebellion began, and this was one of the factors that influenced President Nicolas Sarkozy’s decision to commit France to the attack on Libya. According to these individuals Sarkozy’s plans are driven by the following issues:
a. A desire to gain a greater share of Libya oil production,
b. Increase French influence in North Africa,
c. Improve his internal political situation in France,
d. Provide the French military with an opportunity to reassert its position in the world,
e. Address the concern of his advisors over Qaddafi’s long term plans to supplant France as the dominant power in Francophone Africa)
Ergo as soon as French intel discovered Gaddafi’s dinar plans, they decided to spearhead the campaign against him- having accumulated enough good reasons to take over.
The suicide attack on a concert hall in Manchester in which 22 people were killed and another 166 wounded throws light on Britain’s ill-conceived and dysfunctional policy towards Libya, past and present. While Muammar Gaddafi was in power, this policy drove the UK to welcome Islamists as potential tools to destabilise his regime, and since his ouster in 2011 it has seen it, along with the United States and the United Nations, push for dialogue with Islamists of the same ilk as those behind the Manchester atrocity
The perpetrator of the Manchester atrocity, British-born Libyan Salman al-Abedi, 22, was not your bog-standard, homegrown terrorist: the prodigy of Muslim immigrants who failed to adjust to British culture or who had fallen under the wrong influence online or elsewhere. No, he is largely the outcome of the policy pursued by successive British governments – Conservative and Labour – towards Libya.
Haven for Islamists
Salman al-Abedi did not hail from a typical family that had immigrated to Britain in search of a decent life. His father, Ramadan Belgasem al-Abedi, also known as Abu Ismail, had come with intent. His choice of country was quite deliberate. As a Libyan Islamist escaping from the Gaddafi regime, the UK welcomed him, and many like him, with open arms and gave him political asylum. He settled in Manchester, where about 10,000 Libyans, many of them Islamists, now reside.
Ramadan al-Abedi
In 1994, just two years after arriving in Britain, Al-Abedi senior joined the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG), an affiliate of Al-Qaeda that is listed by the United Nations as a terrorist organisation. He quickly rose up in the organisation’s ranks, as shown by this document from Gaddafi’s intelligence service which puts him at number five in the LIFG.
In addition, Mr Al-Abedi senior, like many of his Islamist compatriots in Manchester, was naturally drawn to the Muslim Brotherhood. Together with his sons, he frequented the Didsbury mosque where he worked as muezzin, or prayer caller, and where his other son, Ismail – the Manchester bomber’s older brother – was a tutor at the mosque’s Qur’an school.
According to an independent group called Muslims In Britain, the Didsbury mosque is of a Salafi-Ikhwan, or fundamentalist-Muslim Brotherhood, orientation. The Brotherhood likes to portray itself to Westerners as a peaceful, democratic and law-abiding organisation. Suffice to say that one of its slogans includes the phrases “Jihad is our way. Dying in the way of God is our highest hope.”
The Didsbury mosque is also linked to organisations founded by Muslim Brotherhood ideologue Yusuf al-Qaradawi, who not only endorses suicide bombings, but also argues that apostates from Islam and those who defy Islamic culture should be immediately put to death. Among the mosque’s publications is a document entitled The special problems of females, which says that “God made boundaries for a man that he should havefour wives” and that there is a ban on wives taking any form of employment.
At the Didsbury mosque, Al-Abedi senior became an associate of Sohail al-Ghariani, son of notorious Libyan cleric Sadiq al-Ghariani, spiritual leader of Libya’s Muslim Brotherhood who subsequently acted as cheerleader of the violent takeover of Tripoli by Islamist militias in 2014. Al-Abedi senior, the BBC reports, also supported the extremist Islamist cleric, Abu Qatada, and used to meet him in London.
Tools of foreign policy
So, it should have been obvious to anyone who wanted to see that Mr Al-Abedi senior was an unsavoury character who should never have been given a safe haven in Britain. But the British state welcomed him, and numerous other Libyans like him, with open arms, even though it knew who these people were and what they stood for. The reason was as cynical as it was shortsighted and counter-productive: Mr Al-Abedi and his comrades in the LIFG and the Muslim Brotherhood were potentially useful tools to deploy against the Gaddafi regime, even though they belonged to organisations that were a million times worse than anything Gaddafi represented.
With the father a member of Al-Qaeda throughout his children’s lives, and with Salman and his two brothers, Ismail and Hashim, immersed in the ideology of the Muslim Brotherhood and jihadism, it is little wonder that all three of Al-Abedi senior’s sons grew up to be terrorists. And it was not long before the British state was able to deploy them – or shall we say facilitate their deployment – and many other Libyan Islamists for the purpose for which they had been given a safe haven in the first place: as weapons against Gaddafi.
Ismail al-Abedi, the Manchester bomber’s older brother, posing with a gun
Hashim al-Abedi, the younger brother of the Manchester, bomber holding a gun
According to Middle East Eye, Britain “facilitated the travel of Libyan exiles and British-Libyan residents and citizens keen to fight against Gaddafi, including some who it deemed to pose a potential security threat”. It cited the case of one British citizen of Libyan descent who had been placed on a control order, or house arrest, because of fears that he would join terrorist groups in Iraq but was nonetheless allowed to travel to Libya in 2011 to participate in the insurrection against the Gaddafi regime.
“I was allowed to go, no questions asked,” said the source, who wished to remain anonymous.
He said he had met several other British-Libyans in London who also had control orders lifted in 2011 as the war against Gaddafi intensified, with the UK, France and the US carrying out air strikes and deploying special forces soldiers in support of the rebels.
“They didn’t have passports, they were looking for fakes or a way to smuggle themselves across,” said the source.
But within days of their control orders being lifted, British authorities returned their passports, he said.
“These were old school LIFG guys, they [the British authorities] knew what they were doing,”he said…
Another Libyan Islamist cited by Middle East Eye, Belal Younis, described how he was virtually encouraged by the British to help bring down the Gaddafi regime. He said he was asked by an intelligence officer from Britain’s domestic security agency, MI5, whether he was “willing to go into battle?” He was told, he said, that the British government had “no problem with people fighting against Gaddafi”.
According to BBC correspondent Gabriel Gatehouse, during the anti-Gaddafi insurrection the Manchester bomber and his father fought with the Tripoli Military Council, which was headed by Abdelhakim Belhadj, the LIFG founder. Speaking on the BBC’s Newsnight TV programme, he said three different sources had told him that the Manchester bomber had travelled to Libya during the summer holidays while he was still at school. “Like many at the time, they went in their school holidays in the summer. They finished school, they broke up, they went out to Libya,” Gatehouse said.
Links to the UN-backed “government”
Sometime after the ouster of the Gaddafi regime Al-Abedi senior returned to Libya and, following the takeover of Tripoli by an alliance of Muslim Brotherhood, LIFG and organised crime militias in 2014, was appointed to security positions. According to The Independent, on the eve of his son’s atrocity in Manchester Al-Abedi senior worked as administrative manager of the so-called “Central Security force” in Tripoli, which is nominally under the control of the UN-backed “Government of National Accord” (GNA) but in reality is run by a mishmash of Islamist and organised crime militias on which the GNA completely relies. Other reports say that, incredibly, he was head of Libya’s Interpol liaison bureau in the Libyan capital.
As news of the Manchester bomber’s identity reached Libya, Al-Abedi senior and his two sons, Ismail and Hashim, were reported to have been “arrested” in Tripoli by the so-called “Special Deterrence Force” – often referred to as Rada, Arabic for deterrence. This is a Salafist-leaning militia and is one of the main armed groups supporting the UN-backed “government”.
Rada leader Abdul Raouf Kara, “a hardline Islamist with a fearful reputation and a Salafist vision for Libya’s future”.
According to the risk consultancy SecDev, “the militia hardliners are mainly Madkhali Salafists, an Islamist ideology that refers to followers of the Saudi cleric Rabia bin Hadi al-Madkhali, who promotes a doctrine of obedience to a sitting political authority (wali al-amr)”. It is led by Abdul Raouf Kara who, SecDev says, is “a hardline Islamist with a fearful reputation and a Salafist vision for Libya’s future”. According to SecDev, Rada has been “accused of acting as a form of ‘moral police’ enforcing conservative dress and behaviour on Tripoli’s civilians and using brutal intimidation rather than focusing on tracking terrorist groups”. So, one can reasonably surmise that, rather than being arrested, the Manchester bomber’s father and two brothers had been taken into protective custody.
Inexplicable policy
From a realpolitik point of view, one can see the logic, albeit cynical and shortsighted, behind the British policy of using potential terrorists to destabilise the regime of a longstanding foe-cum-distrusted friend, even though it is not quite clear how an Islamist regime could be better, in terms of Britain’s purported values, than that of Gaddafi, notwithstanding the brutality, arbitrariness and unpredictability of his regime. What is difficult to understand is Britain’s support for Islamist militias that ousted Libya’s elected government in 2014 and its present support for the UN-brokered outfit in Tripoli which is completely reliant on Islamist and organised crime militias, including Al-Qaeda.
Despite the remark by Philip Hammond, the British foreign secretary, that “there is no authority in Libya to engage with”, the Libyan parliament remains resolute in tribally secure Tobruk. The army and police, with whom we share security and commercial interests, are (albeit only just) containing the extremists in Benghazi. And the administration, backed by the Muslim Brotherhood, occupying Tripoli – with whom we have nothing in common – has been called out on its covert relationships with extremists.
The bottom line is: we can’t do business with the militias occupying Tripoli.
That was in March 2015. Since then a new player has entered the scene, the UN-backed “government”, which exists in Tripoli courtesy of the Islamist and criminal militias blighting the Libyan capital and is riddled with jihadist, including those of Al-Qaeda. Yet Britain recognises it as the “government” of Libya.
The paradox was summed up by the prime minister of the elected government of Libya, Abdullah Thinni. In a statement condemning the Manchester atrocity,reported by Libya Herald, he said that the atrocity stemmed from the presence for decades of terrorist groups in the UK, including the LIFG, “which has been recruiting Libyan and Muslim youth in the UK and Europe and sending them to Libya and other countries to deliver terrorism and death”. This, Thinni’s statement said, had been done with the knowledge and consent of the British government, which had provided a safe haven for the “father” of these terrorists who was now in Tripoli – possibly a reference to the Libyan Muslim Brotherhood spiritual leader, Sadiq al-Ghariani, or LIFG founder Abdelhakim Belhadj. However, despite continuous warnings from the Libyan authorities, the statement concluded, successive British governments and ambassadors had “insisted that we share power in Libya with these terrorist organisations and their militias, the LIFG and the Muslim Brotherhood”.
With so many innocent Britons murdered in Manchester, and reports that one of the terrorists who murdered seven innocent people in London on 3 June, Rasheed Radwan, was Libyan, it is time the British government come clean about its deathly embrace of Islamists. That is the least it can do in memory of those murdered in Manchester and London, and the countless Libyans who have lost their lives at the hands of LIFG, Muslim Brotherhood and other Islamist militias since the overthrow of the Gaddafi regime.
Trump lied to say that Obama had a fake birth certificate, but Trump never attacked Obama for what were Obama’s real crimes. America’s press let him get away with it (of course, they pointed out Trump’s lie, but they protected Obama, just as Trump did, against exposure on that President’s real crimes); so, here are some of the facts that the U.S. press (and Trump) still hide about Obama (because hiding them is essential to the U.S. aristocracy’s agenda — shared by both its Republicans and its Democrats):
On March 23rd, Gallup headlined «South Sudan, Haiti and Ukraine Lead World in Suffering», and the Ukrainian part of that can unquestionably be laid at the feet of Obama, who in February 2014 imposed upon Ukraine a very bloody coup (see it here), which he and his press misrepresented (and still misrepresent) as being (and still represent as having been) a ‘democratic revolution’, but was nothing of the sort, and actually was instead the start of the Ukrainian dictatorship and the hell that has since destroyed that country, and brought the people there into such misery, it’s now by far the worst in Europe, and nearly tied with the worst in the entire world.
America’s criminal ‘news’ media never even reported the coup, nor that in 2011 the Obama regime began planning for a coup in Ukraine, and that by 1 March 2013 they started organizing it inside the U.S. Embassy there, and that they hired members of Ukraine’s two racist-fascist, or nazi, political parties, Right Sector and Svoboda (which latter had been called the Social Nationalist Party of Ukraine until the CIA advised them to change it to Freedom Party, or «Svoboda» instead), and that in February 2014 they did it (and here’s the 4 February 2014 phone call instructing the U.S. Ambassador whom to place in charge of the new regime when the coup will be completed), under the cover of authentic anti-corruption demonstrations that the Embassy organized on the Maidan Square in Kiev, demonstrations that the criminal U.S. ‘news’ media misrepresented as ‘democracy demonstrations,’ though Ukraine already had democracy (but still lots of corruption, even more than today’s U.S. does, and the pontificating Obama said he was trying to end Ukraine’s corruption — which instead actually soared after his coup there). The head of the ‘private CIA’ firm Stratfor said it was «the most blatant coup in history» but he couldn’t say that to Americans, because he knows that our press is just a mouthpiece for the regime (just like it was during the lead-up to George W. Bush’s equally unprovoked invasion of Iraq — for which America’s ‘news’ media suffered likewise no penalties). When subsequently accused by neocons for his having said this, his response was «I told the business journal Kommersant that if the US were behind a coup in Kiev, it would have been the most blatant coup in history,» but he was lying to say this, because, as I pointed out when writing about that rejoinder of his, he had, in fact, made quite clear in his Kommersant interview, that it was, in his view «the most blatant coup in history,» no conditionals on that.
Everybody knows what Obama, and Clinton, and Sarkozy, did to Libya — in their zeal to eliminate yet another nation’s leader who was friendly toward Russia (Muammar Gaddafi), they turned one of the highest-living-standard nations in Africa into a failed state and huge source of refugees (as well as of weapons that the Clinton State Department transferred to the jihadists in Syria to bring down Bashar al-Assad, another ally of Russia) — but the ‘news’ media have continued to hide what Obama (assisted by America’s European allies, especially Poland and Netherlands, and also by America’s apartheid Middle Eastern ally, Israel) did to Ukraine.
And now read this. Here we have the journal The National Interest, which was founded by Irving Kristol, the founder of neoconservatism and therefore the intellectual source for Victoria Nuland and the others whom Obama appointed to run the coup in Ukraine, and even that journal now is publishing the fact that the result of that coup is bad. But, of course, no one, including that publication, is damning, nor even blaming, Obama for destroying Ukraine — which he did.
More details have emerged about the prior familiarity of British intelligence agencies with the [alleged] Manchester suicide bomber, Salman Abedi, whose murderous assault Monday evening left 22 people dead.
Given Abedi’s connections and his travel movements leading up to the attack, the only explanation for him being able to remain at large for so long is that he was a protected asset—part of a broad network of operatives utilised by Britain and the US to conduct their nefarious operations in the Middle East.
It is the exposure of these operations which accounts for the fury of Prime Minister Theresa May over the US leaking of intelligence information about the UK’s investigation into the bombing. Whatever the specific reasons for these leaks, they have completely undermined the British authority’s original claims that Abedi was an unknown, “lone wolf”. Rather, it is now clear that those killed and maimed while enjoying a pop concert are the victims of British regime-change policy in the Middle East and North Africa.
We know now that British intelligence had received warnings, on at least five separate occasions in the last five years, that Abedi presented a danger, including that he had discussed committing a suicide bombing.
According to new leaks Thursday, Abedi had travelled extensively in the run-up to the attack, including flying from Istanbul to the UK via Germany’s Dusseldorf airport. For years, Turkey has been used as a transit point into Syria by European jihadists, joining Western-led efforts to topple the regime of Bashar Al-Assad.
Several sources, including French intelligence, have made public their conclusions that Abedi had been to Syria and received training there. The FinancialTimes also reported that a “Turkish official” said that Abedi had traveled through Istanbul on at least two other occasions over the past year. The newspaper reported,
“In mid-April he flew from Amsterdam to Libya, while in late May 2016 he flew from Manchester to Libya, transiting through Istanbul Ataturk airport both times.”
Abedi may have traveled through at least two European Union countries on his way from Turkey to Manchester. Berlin newspaper Der Tagesspiegel reported that Abedi flew from Dusseldorf to Manchester on May 18—four days before the attack. The newspaper cited German intelligence sources who said that he arrived in Germany from Libya via Prague.
The Guardian reported,
“It is known that the 22-year-old traveled to Germany at least twice, including a visit to the financial city of Frankfurt.” It added, “Düsseldorf is in the state of North Rhine-Westphalia, where Anis Amri, the Berlin Christmas market attacker, spent time.”
Further leaks were reported by the German magazine, Focus. Citing German intelligence sources, it said Abedi flew to Frankfurt from Britain in 2015. Focus said that Germany’s intelligence agency BKA had been told by police in the UK that this visit took place before Abedi undertook paramilitary training in Syria. It reported that he had not been apprehended in Germany, as he was not on any watch list.
There is no innocent explanation for the fact that Abedi was able to travel to Libya, Syria, Turkey and the UK unhindered. It has nothing to do with the spurious claims about the UK having “leaky borders”, or too few border guards. Abedi’s ability to pass through customs without interference can only mean that he had been given the all clear.
For decades, successive British governments have worked with jihadi groups, prepared to use atrocities to achieve their objectives. This has meant that, behind the “war on terror” and the relentless assault on democratic rights that it has entailed, UK authorities have been harbouring Islamist extremist operatives and groups who can be set into motion at the required time, in line with British imperialist foreign policy objectives.
Groups such as Algeria’s Armed Islamic Group (GIA), the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG), Egyptian Islamic Jihad and al-Qaeda all had bases in London. Al-Qaeda considered London the nerve centre of its operations in Europe, with the security services collaborating with some of these organisations and their leaders, the most well known being Abu Hamza and Abu Qatada.
Likewise, British imperialism worked closely with Libyan Islamists, supporting them in their opposition to then Libyan leader Colonel Muammar Gaddafi. As former MI5 agent David Shayler revealed, MI6 collaborated with one such organisation, the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, in the attempted assassination of Gaddafi in 1996.
For years, a group of LIFG members were active in the Whalley Range district of Manchester, close to Salman Abedi’s home. Salman Abedi’s father, Ramadan Abedi, an airport security officer, was an LIFG member. He and his wife, Samia Tabbal, a nuclear scientist, fled Tripoli in 1991 after he was arrested by the Gaddafi regime. He had been employed in the regime’s internal security service and was reportedly suspected of tipping off members of anti-Gaddafi Islamist groups about pending police raids. The Daily Mail reported,
“It appears that Ramadan’s life revolved at several points around toppling Gaddafi…”
After fleeing Libya, Ramadan and his wife lived in Saudi Arabia for a period. They both then went to the UK and applied for and were granted political asylum. They lived first in London and then moved to the south Manchester area, which had become a centre for many anti-Gaddafi elements with which British intelligence maintained the closest links.
Ramadan returned to Libya some time in 2011 in order to fight in the imperialist proxy war that resulted in the overthrow and murder of Gaddafi in October of that year by US/UK-backed “rebels”. This took place after a NATO bombing campaign in which untold numbers were killed nationwide over the preceding eight months. Ramadan went on to become an administrative manager of the Central Security Force in Tripoli, one of the many militias vying for control of the country.
Samia, Abedi’s mother, is a close friend of Umm Abdul Rahman, the widow of a former Al Qaeda commander, Abu Anas al-Libi. Accused of involvement in the 1998 US embassy bombings, the Daily Mail reported that al-Libi “spent five years in Manchester—having won political asylum in Britain in 1995.” The Mail said that
“Abdul Rahman went to college in the Libyan capital with Abedi’s mother, who was studying nuclear engineering. She [Rahman] said the two women also lived together in Manchester for a number of years.”
Al-Libi was seized by US forces in Tripoli in October 2013 and died in 2015 of liver cancer before coming to trial. Following the Manchester bombing, Ramadan Abedi and his youngest son, Hashem, were arrested in Tripoli Tuesday night.
Salman Abedi was also known to have been a close associate of one of the main Islamic State recruiters in the UK, Raphael Hostey, who was killed in a drone strike in Syria in 2016. Hostey grew up in Moss Side, just a mile away from Abedi’s home in the Fallowfield district of the city.
In a statement on the bombing, the government of Abdullah Thinni in Bayda, Libya said it had warned the British government it was harbouring terrorists. Thinni’s government was driven out of Tripoli in 2013 by Islamic extremists, including UK-based Libyan exiles. It accused May’s predecessor David Cameron of backing terrorist groups who
“have been destroying our cities and towns in an attempt to shape Libya into an exporter of terror to the whole planet.”
UK Proscribed terrorist organization, Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG), maintains large presence in Manchester area and is now being linked to recent blast.
May 24, 2017 (Tony Cartalucci – LD) – As suspected and as was the case in virtually all recent terror attacks carried out in Europe – including both in France and Belgium – the suspect involved in the recent Manchester blast which killed 22 and injured scores more was previously known to British security and intelligence agencies.
Salman Abedi, 22, who was reportedly known to the security services, is thought to have returned from Libya as recently as this week.
While initial reports attempted to craft a narrative focused on a a “lone wolf” attacker who organized and executed the blast himself, the nature of the improvised explosive device used and the details of the attack revealed what was certainly an operation carried out by someone who either acquired militant experience through direct contact with a terrorist organization, or was directed by a terrorist organization with extensive experience.
A Thriving Terrorist Community in the Midst of Manchester
The same Telegraph article would also admit (emphasis added):
A group of Gaddafi dissidents, who were members of the outlawed Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG), lived within close proximity to Abedi in Whalley Range. Among them was Abd al-Baset Azzouz, a father-of-four from Manchester, who left Britain to run a terrorist network in Libya overseen by Ayman al-Zawahiri, Osama bin Laden’s successor as leader of al-Qaeda. Azzouz, 48, an expert bomb-maker, was accused of running an al-Qaeda network in eastern Libya. The Telegraph reported in 2014 that Azzouz had 200 to 300 militants under his control and was an expert in bomb-making. Another member of the Libyan community in Manchester, Salah Aboaoba told Channel 4 news in 2011 that he had been fund raising for LIFG while in the city. Aboaoba had claimed he had raised funds at Didsbury mosque, the same mosque attended by Abedi.
Thus, the required experience for the recent Manchester attack exists in abundance within the community’s Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) members.
LIFG is in fact a proscribed terrorist group listed as such by the United Kingdom’s government in 2005, and still appears upon its list of “Proscribed terrorist groups or organisations,” found on the government’s own website.
The accompanying government list (PDF) states explicitly regarding LIFG that:
The LIFG seeks to replace the current Libyan regime with a hard-line Islamic state. The group is also part of the wider global Islamist extremist movement, as inspired by Al Qa’ida. The group has mounted several operations inside Libya, including a 1996 attempt to assassinate Mu’ammar Qadhafi.
Thus, astoundingly, according to the Telegraph, a thriving community of listed terrorists exists knowingly in the midst of the British public, without any intervention by the UK government, security, or intelligence agencies – with members regularly travelling abroad and participating in armed conflict and terrorist activities before apparently returning home – not only without being incarcerated, but apparently also without even being closely monitored.
LIFG also appears on the US State Department’s list of Foreign Terrorist Organizations. Astoundingly, it appears under a section titled, “Delisted Foreign Terrorist Organizations,” and indicates that it was removed as recently as 2015.
On November 3, 2007, [Al Qaeda (AQ)] leader Ayman al-Zawahiri announced a formal merger between AQ and LIFG. However, on July 3, 2009, LIFG members in the United Kingdom released a statement formally disavowing any association with AQ.
The report also makes mention of LIFG’s role in US-led NATO regime change operations in Libya in 2011 (emphasis added):
In early 2011, in the wake of the Libyan revolution and the fall of Qadhafi, LIFG members created the LIFG successor group, the Libyan Islamic Movement for Change (LIMC), and became one of many rebel groups united under the umbrella of the opposition leadership known as the Transitional National Council. Former LIFG emir and LIMC leader Abdel Hakim Bil-Hajj was appointed the Libyan Transitional Council’s Tripoli military commander during the Libyan uprisings and has denied any link between his group and AQ.
Indeed, a literal senior Al Qaeda-affiliate leader would head the regime put into power by US-led military operations – which included British forces.
Not only this, but prominent US politicians would even travel to Libya to personally offer support to Bil-Hajj (also spelled Belhaj). In one notorious image, US Senator John McCain is seen shaking hands with and offering a gift to the terrorist leader in the wake of the Libyan government’s collapse.
The US State Department’s report regarding LIFG ends with information about its “area of operation,” claiming (emphasis added):
Since the late 1990s, many members have fled to southwest Asia, and European countries, particularly the UK.
For the residents of Manchester, the British government appears to have categorically failed to inform them of the threat living openly in their midst. While the British population is divided and distracted with a more general strategy of tension focused on Islam, Muslims, and Islamophobia, the very specific threat of US-UK sanctioned terrorists living and operating within British communities is overlooked by the public.
However – for British security and intelligence agencies – it is unlikely that such an obvious security threat was merely “overlooked.” That extremists thrive within British communities without government intervention indicates complicity, not incompetence.
British intelligence and security service interest in Libya has focused for 20 years on the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG), whether it was opposing Muammar Gaddafi and working with al-Qaida, later renouncing its old jihadi worldview – or taking part in the armed uprising that has now overthrown the regime.
The article in reality is nothing more than an attempt to portray a listed terrorist organization as “reformed” ahead of increased public awareness regarding the true nature of Libya’s US and British-backed “rebels.”
LIFG members would not only assist the US and British governments in the 2011 overthrow of the Libyan government, they would also move on – with Western arms and cash – to NATO-member Turkey where they staged an invasion of northern Syria.
Abdulhakim Belhadj, head of the Tripoli Military Council and the former leader of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, “met with Free Syrian Army leaders in Istanbul and on the border with Turkey,” said a military official working with Mr Belhadj. “Mustafa Abdul Jalil (the interim Libyan president) sent him there.”
The article would continue by reporting:
The meetings came as a sign of a growing ties between Libya’s fledgling government and the Syrian opposition. The Daily Telegraph on Saturday revealed that the new Libyan authorities had offered money and weapons to the growing insurgency against Bashar al-Assad. Mr Belhaj also discussed sending Libyan fighters to train troops, the source said. Having ousted one dictator, triumphant young men, still filled with revolutionary fervour, are keen to topple the next. The commanders of armed gangs still roaming Tripoli’s streets said yesterday that “hundreds” of fighters wanted to wage war against the Assad regime.
Revealed once again is a convenient intersection of terrorist and US-British interests – this time in pursuit of regime change in Syria in the wake of successful US-UK backed regime change in Libya.
Confirming that these plans to send Libyan extremists to fight in Syria were eventually executed is CNN’s 2012 article, “Libya rebels move onto Syrian battlefield,” which reported:
Under the command of one of Libya’s most well known rebel commanders, Al-Mahdi al-Harati, more than 30 Libyan fighters have made their way into Syria to support the Free Syrian Army rebels in their war against President Bashar al-Assad’s regime.
Al Harati’s army of Libyan terrorists would expand to hundreds, possibly thousands of fighters and later merge with other Syrian militant groups including Al Qaeda’s Syrian franchise – Jabhat Al Nusra. In Libya, LIFG fighters have divided themselves among various warring factions, including Al Qaeda and Islamic State affiliates.
As these terrorists filter out of Syria and back home, those hailing from LIFG are mainly returning to the UK where they have been known by US and British security and intelligence agencies for years to exist. With them they will be bringing back the technical knowledge and experience needed to carry out devastating attacks like the recent blast that targeted Manchester.
It is terrorism that follows as a direct result of British foreign and domestic policy – supporting terrorists abroad and deliberately refusing to dismantle their networks at home – all as they feed fighters and resources into the US-UK proxy war still raging in Syria.
The British government is directly responsible for the recent Manchester blast. It had foreknowledge of LIFG’s existence and likely its activities within British territory and not only failed to act, but appears to have actively harbored this community of extremists for its own geopolitical and domestic agenda.
The recent blast will only reinforce the unsophisticated “tolerance versus bigotry” narrative that has gripped British society, entirely sidestepping the reality of government sanctioned terrorism wielded both abroad and against its own people – not for ideological or religious purposes – but purely in pursuit of geopolitical hegemony.
That the US and UK are using terrorists to expedite their respective geopolitical objectives should come as no surprise – particularly in regards to LIFG – since the organization itself branched out of Washington’s mercenary fighters used against the Soviets in Afghanistan in the 1980s.
What is surprising is that the Western public continues to react emotionally to each terrorist attack individually rather than rationally, seeing the much larger picture and pattern. And until the Western public sees that bigger picture and pattern, fear, injustice, murder, and mayhem will continue to dominate their lives and futures.
Here’s what the media and politicians don’t want you to know about the Manchester, UK, suicide attack: Salman Abedi, the 22-year-old who killed nearly two dozen concert-goers in Manchester, UK, was the product of the US and UK overthrow of Gaddafi in Libya and “regime change” policy in Syria. He was a radicalized Libyan whose family fled Gaddafi’s secular Libya, and later he trained to be an armed “rebel” in Syria, fighting for the US and UK “regime change” policy toward the secular Assad government.
The suicide attacker was the direct product of US and UK interventions in the greater Middle East.
According to the London Telegraph, Abedi, a son of Libyan immigrants living in a radicalized Muslim neighborhood in Manchester had returned to Libya several times after the overthrow of Muamar Gaddafi, most recently just weeks ago. After the US/UK and allied “liberation” of Libya, all manner of previously outlawed and fiercely suppressed radical jihadist groups suddenly found they had free rein to operate in Libya. This is the Libya that Abedi returned to and where he likely prepared for his suicide attack on pop concert attendees. Before the US-led attack on Libya in 2011, there was no al-Qaeda, ISIS, or any other related terrorist organization operating (at least with impunity) on Libyan soil.
Gaddafi himself warned Europe in January 2011 that if they overthrew his government the result would be radical Islamist attacks on Europe, but European governments paid no heed to the warnings. Post-Gaddafi Libya became an incubator of Islamist terrorists and terrorism, including prime recruiting ground for extremists to fight jihad in Syria against the also-secular Bashar Assad.
In Salman Abedi we have the convergence of both these disastrous US/UK and allied interventions, however: it turns out that not only did Abedi make trips to Libya to radicalize and train for terror, but he also traveled to Syria to become one of the “Syria rebels” fighting on the same side as the US and UK to overthrow the Assad government. Was he perhaps even trained in a CIA program? We don’t know, but it certainly is possible.
While the mainstream media and opportunistic politicians will argue that the only solution is more western intervention in the Middle East, the plain truth is that at least partial responsibility for this attack lies at the feet of those who pushed and pursued western intervention in Libya and Syria.
There would have been no jihadist training camps in Libya had Gaddafi not been overthrown by the US/UK and allies. There would have been no explosion of ISIS or al-Qaeda in Syria had it not been for the US/UK and allied policy of “regime change” in that country.
When thinking about Abedi’s guilt for this heinous act of murder, do not forget those interventionists who lit the fuse that started this conflagration. The guilt rests squarely on their shoulders as well.
On Wednesday, Algerian-born Bernard-Henri Levi, 68, the self-appointed French philosopher, was hit with a pie while promoting his propaganda documentary Peshmerga which is about the Kurds fighting the US-Israel created ISIS.
A Serb protester chanting Murderer, leave Belgrade hurled a pie at his face when he was presenting the film. Another protester climbed the stage with a banner bearing Jewish-communist hammer and sickle that read, Bernard Levy advocates imperialist murderers.
As a typical humiliated Zionist whore, Levy equated Serbia with Syria – he shouted Long Live Democracy in French. It’s is the same idiot who never get tired calling Israel being the only democracy in the Middle East – a very disputed statement even by Jew scholars (here,here).
Serbian nationalists see Levy as one of the main advocates of NATO bombing of Serbia in 1999 over Belgrade’s crackdown on Kosovan separatists.
MP Vojislav Seselj said in parliament: “Levy deserved much worse than a cake in face.”
Serbian largest newspaper Kurir even claimed that Bernard Levy faked the incident to make Serbia look bad.
“An identical incident occurred 23 years ago in Cannes, leaving doubt that Levy stages attacks just to make Serbs look bad,” the paper claimed. Being an Israeli agent in France, Levy must have learned such trick from Mossad.
Levy is a close friend of former French presidents, Jacques Chirac, Francois Hollande and Nicolas Sarkozy. In November 2011, speaking at the first national Jewish convention in Paris, organized by the French Israel Lobby, the Council of Jewish Organization of France, Levy boasted that he lead the anti-Qaddafi campaign because it was a Jewish thing to do.
“What I have done all these months, I did as a Jew. And like all the Jews of the world, I was worried. Despite legitimate anxiety is an uprising to be welcomed with favor, we were dealing with one of the worst enemy of Israel,” said Levy.
In February 2017, Levi stated that if French communist party presidential candidate Jean-Luc Melenchon wins, he would leave France. Jean-Luc Melenchon is considered pro-Palestinian by the country’s organized Jewry.
Bernard-Henry Levy, appeared on world-stage during his campaign for the release of Jewish film director Roman Polanski, who was arrested in Switzerland on September 26, 2009, for having unlawful sexual relationship with a 13-year-old girl in 1977.
On July 4, 2011, Bernard Levy sponsored first Israeli conference on Syria in Paris. The conference was attended by Bernard Kouchner, former French Jew foreign minister and founder of Médecins Sans Frontières (Doctors Without Borders), Frederik Ansel, a member of Israel’s ruling Likud Party, Alex Goldfarb, former Knesset member and adviser to Israeli defense minister Ehud Barak and Andre Glucksmann, an Islamophobe French writer (here).
Bernard Levy had spewed his anti-Muslim propaganda from Bosnia to Bangladesh. In 2002, French president Chirac sent Levy to Afghanistan on an official mission to find out what Afghans expect from Paris to defeat Taliban. During his visit, Levy set-up Radio Free Kabul. Levi is author of several books including Qui a tue Daniel Pearl, in which he whines about Mossad spy Daniel Pearl who was killed in 2002 while snooping around as WSJ journalist in Karachi.
In 1971, Bernard Levy pleaded with French president Georges Pompidou to help Indian invasion of East Pakistan in order to establish a separate homeland for Bengali people.
An extract from Secret Affairs: Britain’s Collusion with Radical Islam, by Mark Curtis
Britain’s willingness to work with Islamist forces has been evident in Libya, where it took a brutal civil war between armed opposition forces and remnants of the regime to overthrow Libyan ruler, Muammar Qadafi, who was killed in October 2011. Massive NATO air strikes, mainly by Britain and France, were conducted during March-October in support of the rebel forces and significantly contributed to the rebel victory. What concerns the story here is not a review of the whole intervention but the extent to which it involved an Islamist element being supported by Britain in furtherance of its objectives in the Middle East.
The Islamist forces were only part of the military opposition that overthrew Qadafi, but were an important element, especially in the east of the country which was where the uprising began and which provided the centre of opposition to Qadafi. The episode, to some extent, echoes past British interventions where Islamist actors have acted as among the foot-soldiers in British policy to secure energy interests. That the British military intervention to overthrow Qadafi was primarily motivated by such interests seems clear – in the absence of access to government files – to which we briefly turn later. Such oil and gas interests in Libya, however, has been downplayed by ministers and largely ignored by the media, in favour of notions of Britain being motivated by the need to support the human rights of the Libyan people and promote democracy: concerns completely absent when it came to defending the rights of other Middle Easterners being abused at precisely the same time, notably Bahrainis.
Britain provided a range of support to the rebel Libyan leadership, which was grouped in the National Transitional Council (NTC), an initially 33-member self-selected body of mainly former Qadafi ministers and other opposition forces, formed in Benghazi in February 2011 to provide an alternative government. UN Security Council Resolution 1973 was passed on 17 March, imposing a no fly zone over Libya and authorizing ‘all necessary measures…to protect civilians’ under threat of attack. In an echo of Kosovo in 1999, it was certainly questionable whether civilians in Libya were under the extent of attack described by British ministers as justification for their military intervention, such as David Cameron’s claim that ‘we averted a massacre’.
Subsequently, British policy went well beyond the narrow strictures of the UN resolution, clearly seeking to target Qadafi personally and overthrow the regime. British air strikes and cruise missile attacks began on 19 March and within the first month of what became a seven-month bombing campaign NATO had flown 2,800 sorties, destroying a third of Qadafi’s military assets, according to NATO. The RAF eventually flew over 3,000 sorties over Libya, damaging or destroying 1,000 targets, while Britain also sent teams of regular army, SAS and MI6 officers to advise the NTC on ‘military organizational structures, communications and logistics’. Britain also assisted NATO airstrikes by deploying SAS troops to act as ground spotters and supplied military communications equipment and body armour. Whitehall also aided the NTC’s ‘media and broadcasting operations’ and invited the NTC to establish an office in London.
Military operations were coordinated with France while the US, which played no overt part in the military intervention, authorised $25 million in covert aid to the rebels in April. British ministers denied that they provided arms and military training to the NTC (given that an international arms embargo was applied to Libya) but media reports suggested that the US gave a green light for the new Egyptian regime to supply arms and also asked Saudi Arabia to covertly do so.
The NTC’s military forces were led by various former Libyan army officers, such as Colonel Khalifa Haftar who had set up the ‘Libyan National Army’ in 1988 with support from the CIA and Saudis and who had been living for the past 20 years near Langley, Virginia, home of the CIA, which also provided him with a training camp. But Islamist elements were also prominent. Two former mujahideen who had fought in Afghanistan led the military campaign against Qadafi’s forces in Darnah, to the east of Benghazi, for example. Abdel Hakim al-Hasady, an influential Islamic preacher who spent five years at a jihadist training camp in eastern Afghanistan, oversaw the recruitment, training and deployment in the conflict of around 300 rebel fighters from Darnah. Both al-Hasady and his field commander on the front lines, Salah al-Barrani, were former members of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG), the Islamist force that had long targeted Qadafi, and which Britain covertly funded to kill Qadafi in 1996.
It was also reported that Sufyan Ben Qumu, a Libyan army veteran who worked for Osama bin Laden’s holding company in Sudan and later for an al-Qaida-linked charity in Afghanistan, ran the training of many of Darnah’s rebel recruits. Qumu spent six years at Guantanamo Bay before he was turned over to Libyan custody in 2007; he was released, along with al-Hasady, from a Libyan prison in 2008 as part of Libya’s reconciliation with the LIFG. Al-Hasady, who had fought against the US in Afghanistan in 2001, had been arrested in Pakistan in 2002 and turned over to the US, imprisoned probably at the US base at Bagram, Afghanistan, and then mysteriously released. The US Deputy Secretary of State, James Steinberg, told Congressmen he would speak of al-Hasady’s career only in a closed session.
In an interview with an Italian newspaper in late March 2011, al-Hasady said he had previously recruited ‘around 25’ men from the Darnah area to fight against coalition troops in Iraq. Some of them, he said, were ‘today are on the front lines in Adjabiya’, a coastal city in north-central Libya which saw some of the heaviest fighting against Qadafi’s forces. Wikileaks cables obtained by the British media revealed US files highlighting supporters of Islamist causes among the opposition to Qadafi’s regime, particularly in the towns of Benghazi and Darnah, and that the latter area was a breeding ground for fighters destined for Afghanistan and Iraq.
Captured al-Qaida documents that fell into American hands in 2007 showed that Libya provided more foreign fighters to Iraq in per capita terms than any other country and that most of the volunteers were from the country’s northeast, notably Benghazi and Darnah. Former CIA operations officer Brian Fairchild wrote that since ‘the epicentre of the revolt [in Libya] is rife with anti-American and pro-jihad sentiment, and with al-Qaida’s explicit support for the revolt, it is appropriate to ask our policy makers how American military intervention in support of this revolt in any way serves vital US strategic interests’.
Other commentators recognised the Islamist nature of some of the rebels. Noman Benotman, a former member of the LIFG who had fought the Soviets in Afghanistan, estimated that there were 1,000 jihadists fighting in Libya. Former Director of MI6, Sir Richard Dearlove observed that the rebel stronghold of Benghazi was ‘rather fundamentalist in character’ and Admiral James Stavridis, NATO’s Supreme Allied Commander in Europe, said that US intelligence had picked up ‘flickers’ of terrorist activity among the rebel groups; this was described by senior British government figures as ‘very alarming’.
Shadow foreign secretary Douglas Alexander said in parliament that since there was evidence of the presence of al-Qaida-linked forces among the rebels, Britain should ‘proceed with very real caution’ in arming them. In response, William Hague downplayed the concern, saying that ‘of course we want to know about any links with al-Qaida, as we do about links with any organisations anywhere in the world, but given what we have seen of the interim transitional national council in Libya, I think it would be right to put the emphasis on the positive side’. Following a Freedom of Information request by the author to the Ministry of Defence, asking for the latter’s assessment of the presence of al-Qaida forces or their sympathisers in the Libyan rebel forces, the MoD replied that it did not even want to disclose whether it held such information because this would be contrary to the ‘public interest’.
The extent to which these Islamist and al-Qaida-linked elements may have received weapons or military support from the British, French, Egyptians or Saudi Arabians is not yet known, but officials in Chad and Algeria repeatedly expressed concerns that the al-Qaida in the Islamic Maghreb organisation might have acquired heavy weapons, thanks to the arms supply. What is known is that the state of Qatar was a major financial backer of the Libyan rebels, providing them with a massive $400 million worth of support, much of which was provided to the Islamist radicals. Moreover, Qatar also sent hundreds of troops to fight on the frontline and to provide infantry training to Libyan fighters in the western Nafusa mountains and in eastern Libya. Much of Qatar’s support went to the so-called 17 February Martyrs Brigade, one of the most influential rebel formations led by Abdel-Hakim Belhaj, a leading member of the LIFG who became the rebel military commander in Tripoli.
Qatar’s support for the Islamists in Libya was surely known to British ministers, as they consistently supported Qatar’s prominent role in the campaign against Qadafi, alongside deepening military and commercial cooperation, as we see in the next section. Indeed, Qatar’s chief-of-staff, Major-General Hamad bin Ali al-Atiya, later said: ‘We acted as the link between the rebels and Nato forces’. Qatar also played a key role alongside Britain in the ‘Libya contact group’ that coordinated policy against the Qadafi regime; the first meeting of the group, in April 2011, for example, was convened by Qatar and co-chaired by Britain in Doha. After Qadafi was overthrown, Libya’s new oil minister, Ali Tarhouni, issued a rebuke to Qatar saying that ‘anyone who wishes to come to our house should knock on the front door first’; this was described by the Economist as ‘a thinly-veiled warning to Qatar to stop favouring ambitious Islamists at the expense of the shaky central government’.
What is especially intriguing about this episode relates to the past British support for the LIFG to overthrow Qadafi and whether the British still saw LIFG fighters and other Libyan Islamists as, in effect, their boots on the ground, similar to the way the British saw the Kosovo Liberation Army, then working alongside al-Qaida, in the Kosovo war of 1999. This is surely likely but again the details are murky. Certainly, there were plenty of LIFG fighters available to challenge Qadafi both in Britain and Libya, helped by a reconciliation process between the regime and the LIFG begun in 2007 and presided over by Saif al-Islam al-Qadafi, the son of the ruler. This process resulted in 2009 in dozens of LIFG members being freed from jail in Libya in return for giving up their war against the regime. In July 2009, 30 LIFG members living in Britain, some of them senior figures in the group, signed on to the reconciliation process. British Home Office Control Orders imposed on them, having been regarded as posing a danger to UK national security, were, in some cases at least, dropped. Many of the released LIFG fighters are likely to have taken part in the uprising against Qadafi alongside those who had never been captured by the regime. A series of documentaries shown on the al-Jazeera news channel followed a group of Libyan exiles in London return to Libya to take part in the overthrow of Qadafi.
In mid-March 2011, when the Qadafi regime was still clinging to power in Tripoli, Libyan authorities paraded in front of the world’s media a British citizen captured in Libya and branded an Islamic terrorist. Salah Mohammed Ali Aboaoba said he was a member of the LIFG and had moved from Yemen to Britain in 2005, where he stayed until 2010, having been granted asylum, living with his family in Manchester and raising funds for the LIFG. There is no evidence that the British authorities facilitated the despatch of LIFG fighters from Britain to Libya, which may have been a re-run of the Kosovo conflict. Yet there is the suspicion that the Libyan reconciliation process could have enabled the British, and US, to maintain contacts with the LIFG and to regard them as potential future collaborators to remove Qadafi.
At the very least, Britain in 2011 once again found that its interests – mainly concerning oil – coincided with those of Islamist forces in Libya. By now, however, the British relationship with the LIFG was clearly quite complex. Blair’s government had been so keen to curry favour with Qadafi that in 2004 MI6 was involved in the seizure of LIFG leader Abdel-Hakim Belhaj and his deputy Sami al-Saadi. Belhaj was captured at Bangkok airport and claims he was handed over to the CIA, who he alleges tortured him and injected him with truth serum before flying him back to Tripoli for interrogation. Belhaj subsequently spent six years in solitary confinement at Tripoli’s notorious Abu Selim jail, and claims that he was questioned by three British agents, who ignored his complaints about mistreatment.
MI5 sent a delegation to Tripoli in 2005, apparently to cement relations with the Qadafi regime at a time when the British were concerned with the potential threat posed to British security by other dissident members of LIFG living in the UK, whom they believed were increasingly inspired by al-Qaida. MI5 also gave the Libyan regime the names, personal details and addresses of 50 LIFG members living in the UK. Once again, the episode highlights how expedient British policy towards the LIFG was – covertly supporting the organisation in the mid-1990s and acquiescing in its presence in London as a counter to the Libyan regime, then taking action against it at the behest of Qadafi, while later finding itself on the same side again and working alongside those, such as Qatar, providing significant military and financial support to it.
****Editors note: In other words England for over a century has been affiliating all kind of terrorists gave them asylum a British passport aka British citizens all terrorists were working with MI5/MI6 and black ops and when Britain would find a window to overthrow any sovereign government so that it could steal its resources they would use these terrorists. Britain has no intention to protect its own people so any terrorist act that is taken towards Britain the only one who is to blame is MI5/MI6 and the shadow government same goes to all other European countries who have been sleeping with the devil (Alqaeda, Isis, Nusra etc) using them for their own interests. Europe and USA have no interest in DEMOCRACY or saving civilians but how to steal resources and war my friends is a GOOD BUSINESS, as refugees is a GOOD BUSINESS, human trafficking is a GOOD BUSINESS, organ harvesting is a GOOD BUSINESS.
IF YOU THINK THAT YOUR COUNTRY WORRIES ABOUT YOU. YOU ARE SADLY MISTAKEN AND UNLESS YOU WAKE UP AND GET OUT OF YOUR COMFORT ZONE AND START FIGHTING AGAINST THE ESTABLISHMENT THAT IS EARNING IN THE TRILLIONS WHILE YOU GET CHUM-CHANGE AND SUFFER AUSTERITY. WAKE UP
On Wednesday, Algerian-born Bernard-Henri Levi, 68, the self-appointed French philosopher, was hit with a pie while promoting his propaganda documentary 
In February 2017, Levi stated that if French communist party presidential candidate Jean-Luc Melenchon wins, he would leave France. Jean-Luc Melenchon is considered pro-Palestinian by the country’s organized Jewry.
UPROOTED PALESTINIANS: SALAM ALQUDS ALAYKUM 