The ominous Jihadis war; From Tripoli to Tripoli:

The ominous Jihadis war; From Tripoli to Tripoli:

May 23, 2020

By Ghassan Kadi for the Saker Blog

The ‘War on Syria’ is far from being over, and it will continue until all foreign forces illegally present on Syrian soil retreat; either willingly, or defeated.

And even though the American presence in Syria has no clear and realistic political purpose other than wreaking havoc. and making it hard for Russia to help reach a decisive victory, in a twist of fate, the focus of the Russo-American conflict in the region may soon move away from Syria.

In reality, the outcome of the ‘War on Syria’ was never expected by the initial assembly of adversaries when they launched the attack. Furthermore, they had many deep differences and nothing in common other than a shared hatred for Syria, but the unexpected turn of events has intensified their internal conflict and seemingly catapulted the strife between those former allies much further afield to a new hub in Libya.

Whilst the world and its media are busy with COVID-19, a new huge struggle is brewing, and this time, it is drawing new lines and objectives that are in reality going to be fueled, financed and executed by the former once-united enemies of Syria; but this time, it will be against each other.

An array of regional and international issues lies behind the impending conflict; and to call it impending is an under-statement. It is already underway, but hasn’t reached its peak yet, let alone making any significant news coverage.

It is a real mess in Libya now, and the short version of a long story goes like this:

Soon after NATO hijacked the UNSC mandate to enforce a no-fly-zone decision over Libya and manipulated it in a manner that ‘legalised’ bombing Libya culminating in toppling and killing Gadhafi, the Libyan Government of National Accord (GNA), based in the formal capital Tripoli on the Western side of the coast, was created.

But the ‘revolution’ against Gadhafi was launched in the eastern coastal city of Benghazi. After Gadhafi’s demise, another interim government was formed in Libya’s east under the name of National Transitional Council (NTC).

The NTC, whose flag is the flag of the ‘revolution’, did not recognize the GNA and regarded it as a Western lackey.

After a few years of squabbling, NTC strongman General Haftar decided to militarily disable the GNA.

With little concrete protection on the ground from the West, and under the guise of upholding UNSC mandates, Erdogan jumped into the existing void and the opportunity to grab Libya’s oil, and decided to send troops to support the GNA.

In return, Haftar is getting support from other regional players. Recently, representatives from Egypt, the UAE, Greece, Cyprus and France had a meeting and denounced Turkey’s involvement in Libya. Erdogan perhaps borrowed a term from his American part-ally-part-adversary and referred to the meeting and its decree as an ‘alliance of evil’. Fancy this, a NATO member accusing other NATO members of being in an alliance of evil.

It must be noted that even though Saudi Arabia did not attend the meeting, it was there in spirit, and represented by its proxy-partner the UAE.

The USA took a step further and accused Russia and Syria of working behind the scenes and planning to send fighters to Libya to support Haftar.

But this article is not about the geopolitical hoo-ha. It is about shedding a light on what score-settling is expected to eventuate in Libya, and who is likely to end up doing the fighting against who.

Even though the Afghani Mujahedeen were purportedly the first Jihadi fighters to engage in battle in the 20th Century, their fight was against foreign USSR troops. In terms of an internal force that aimed for fundamentalist Muslim rule, there is little doubt that the first event of such insurgency in the Middle East was the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) revolt that took place in Syria in the early 1980’s and which was quashed by the then President, Hafez Assad. After their smashing defeat, the fundamentalists kept their heads low until they lit the flame again in the Palestinian refugee Naher Al-Bared Camp at the northern outskirts of Tripoli Lebanon in 2007.

There are, for those who are unaware, two cities bearing the name Tripoli on the Mediterranean coast; one is in Northern Lebanon, and it is Lebanon’s second largest city, and the other Tripoli is located on the Western side of the Libyan Coast. They are sometimes called Tripoli of the East and Tripoli of the West, respectively.

Shaker Al-Absi, leader of Fateh Al Islam, a Salafist terror organization, declared jihad and engaged in a bitter fight against the Lebanese Army. He was defeated, remained at large, but any look at Lebanon’s Tripoli after his demise displayed a clear evidence of a huge build-up of Salafist presence in the city.

When the ‘War on Syria’ started only four years later, Tripoli became a major hub for the transport of fighters and munitions from Lebanon into Syria. Nearly a decade later, and with a few Jihadi pockets left in the Idlib province now, their defeat in Syria is imminent.

But who exactly are those murderous head-chopping radical elements that we talking about; past and present?

When the coalition that started the attack on Syria took form, it was comprised virtually of all of Syria’s enemies. Most of them were religious fundamentalists. In an early article, I called them ‘The Anti-Syrian Cocktail’.

Back then, ISIS, did not exist in the form that it became known as. Furthermore, I have always advocated that there was no difference at all between Al-Nusra and ISIS and/or any other Takfiri organizations. They are all terror-based and founded on violent readings of Islam.

In time however, and this didn’t take long, it became apparent that even though the ideologies were identical, there were two major financiers and facilitators to those many different terror organizations. One was primarily funded by Saudi Arabia and the UAE, and the other by Qatar and facilitated by Turkey.

The former group is affiliated with what is known as Saudi Wahhabi Islam. They are also known as the Salafists. The latter group are the MB’s.

As the war was shifting in favour of Syria, their agendas diverged, the schism grew deeper and strong rivalries emerged; especially as the Wahhabis and their sponsors were sent home defeated. Part of this fallout was the ongoing Saudi-Qatari conflict.

But the rivalry that is least spoken about is personal. It is the one between Erdogan and Al-Saud.

They are both fighting over the leadership of fundamentalist Sunni Islam. But Erdogan also has his nationalist anti-Kurdish agenda, and of course, he is desperate to put his hands on oil supplies that he can call his own. He cannot find oil on Turkish soil or in Turkish waters, but he is prepared to act as a regional pirate and a thug and steal another nation’s oil. If no one is to stop him, he feels that he can and will.

Upon realizing that Turkey could not get in Syria either victory or oil, Erdogan is now turning his face west towards Libya. He finds in Libya a few scores that he hopes to settle after his failure in Syria. He wants a face-saving military victory, he wants to assert his position as THE Sunni leader who can reclaim glory, and he wants free oil. Last but not least, In Libya, he will find himself close to Egypt’s Sisi; the political/religious enemy who toppled his MB friend and ally, President Mursi.

On the other side, defeated but not totally out, Saudi Arabia wants blood; Erdogan’s blood.

The Saudis blame Erdogan (and Qatar) for their loss in Syria because he was more focused on his own agenda and spoils rather than the combined ones of the former alliance they had with him. They blame him for abandoning them and making deals with Russia. They hold him responsible for the breakup of the unity of Muslim fundamentalism. They fear his aspirations for gaining the hearts and minds of Muslims who regard him as a de-facto Caliph. As a matter of fact, it was Saudi Crown Prince MBS who used the borrowed word ‘evil’ first when he stated more than two years ago that Erdogan was a part of a ‘Triangle of Evil’. And how can we forget the Khashoggi debacle and the ensuing standoff between Turkey and Saudi Arabia?

We must stop and remember once again that not long ago at all, Turkey and Saudi Arabia were allies, who together, plotted how to invade Syria and bring her down to her knees. These are the heads of the two major countries that facilitated the war machine with Saudi money injecting fighters and munitions into Syria from the south, and open Turkish borders and Qatari money injecting them from the north.

Back to Libyan General Haftar. In his westerly advance along Libya’s terrain, he cleaned up the ISIS elements who stood in his way and hindered his progress. But ironically, he is now fighting their religious rival; the Turks, the protectors of the MB’s.

The USA may accuse Syria of sending troops into Libya, but where is the proof and why should Syria do this after all? And even though the Saudis and the Emiratis are warming up relationships with Syria, the Syrian Army is still engaged in battle and is not prepared to go and fight in Libya. There is nothing for it to gain. Once the war is over, Syria will be concerned with rebuilding a war-torn nation. Syria has no interests in Libya; none what-so-ever.

The role of Russia is not very clear on the ground even though there are clear indications that Russia supports Haftar ideologically. The support began when Haftar demonstrated to the Russians that he was adamant about fighting ISIS and exterminating its presence in Libya. He lived up to this promise thus far and gained Russian respect.

How will the situation in Libya eventually pan out is anyone’s guess. That said, apart from sending regular Turkish Army units, Erdogan is not short on rounding up fighters; and he has attained much experience in this infamous field of expertise from his vicious attack on Syria. With Qatari money in his pocket, he can recruit as many fighters as Qatar can afford.

Erdogan realizes that the West is not interested in backing him up militarily in Libya. The best deal he can get from America is a tacit support. And with France, a NATO member taking part in the above-mentioned five-nation conference, he will definitely have to stand alone so-to-speak.

He has Qatar behind him, but how powerful is Qatar? A ‘nation’ of 200,000 citizens? How can such a small state play such a big role and why?

Qatar is not really a nation or even a state in the true sense. Qatar is an entity, a ‘corporation’ owned by a ruling dynasty that serves the interests of the USA and Israel. This family will outlay any sum of money to guarantee its own protection and continuity.

And Erdogan, the friend-and-foe of both of America and Israel, knows the vulnerabilities and strengths of Qatar, and he is using his deceptive talents to provide the Qatari ruling family with the securities that the shortfalls that America and Israel do not provide. For example, it was he who sent troops to Qatar after the Saudi threats. And even though Erdogan will never take any serious actions against his NATO masters except in rhetoric, the weak and fearful Qataris will dance to the tune of any protector and will sell their souls to the devil should they need to.

On the other hand in Libya, if Haftar finds himself facing a huge Turkish army, he will need assistance on the ground. Where will he seek it from?  His next-door neighbour Egypt? If so, will it be in the form of regular army units or hired guns?

Sisi is neither a religious nor a fundamentalist zealot, but this is not meant to be a complementary statement. He has not taken any serious black-and-white steps in regional politics. This does not mean he is a man of principles. He is probably waiting for dollar signs, and if he sees financial benefits in supporting Saudi Arabia in a proxy war against Turkey in Libya, he may opt to agree; if the price it right.

Whether or not Saudi Arabia can afford a new war, especially with current crude prices, is another story, but as the war on Yemen winds down, the gung-ho MBS is irrational enough to be persuaded. His regional enemy is no longer Assad. His current enemy is Erdogan.

To be fair to MBS, despite his vile, criminal and megalomaniac attributes, he never claims to be a religious leader, but Erdogan does, and many Sunni Muslims see in Erdogan THE leader they have been waiting for. This alone constitutes a huge challenge for MBS because neither he, nor anyone else in the whole of Saudi Arabia for that matter, is regarded anywhere in the Muslim World as a potential leader of the Sunni Muslims.

In reality, as far as Muslim leadership is concerned, the Saudis can only bank on the location of Mecca in Saudi Arabia. Apart from this, they only have wealth that enables them to buy supporters, but their oil wealth is becoming increasingly vulnerable.

In the uphill fight against Erdogan within the Muslim World, both of the Saudis and the Turks realize that the fight between them in Syria is over. Actually, the Saudis have no loyal ‘troops’ on Syrian soil left to fight anyone with. This begs the question of whether or not the Turks and Saudis are moving the battle ground and the score settling from Syria to Libya.

This time around, such a potential battle between the two lines of Jihadis may have to morph from a fight between terror organizations to a war between regular armies; the Turkish Army against the Egyptian Army. Such a battle will rage over Libyan soil, with the Turks financed by Qatar and Egypt by Saudi Arabia.

Such a war will not necessarily bring in Iran into the fight. If it eventuates, it will be a fundamentalist Sunni-Sunni war, sponsored by fundamentalist Sunni states, each fighting for and against different versions of radical Muslim fundamentalism, under the watchful eyes of the USA and to the glee of Israel.

The jihadi war that was first ignited in Tripoli Lebanon between a rogue terror organization and the Lebanese Army did not end. It kept moving theatres and objectives and changing players. Is the final score going to be settled in Tripoli Libya?


Posted on February 20, 2013 by Libya 360°

UN Human Rights Commissioner Navi Pillay: “Pretext-maker” for Western Military Aggression

Ken Stone
Navi Pillay is up to her old tricks: she’s abusing her position as United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights to provide a pretext for imperial aggression against Syria. Today, February 18, 2013, she repeated her call for Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad to be referred for investigation to the International Criminal Court (ICC) for the actions of his forces in trying to repel the western-back mercenary war against his country, which the UN says has killed almost 70000 in 22 months of fighting. And she went even further in calling for immediate action by the international community to end the killing, up to and including military intervention.
What Pillay is seeking is an indictment (arrest warrant) against Assad so as to demonize the Syrian president and delegimitize his government in the eyes of western public opinion and to turn Assad into an international pariah in anticipation of a possible, full-scale, western, military but “humanitarian” intervention for regime change in Syria.
Pillay’s remarks of today represent an escalation in her crusade against the Syrian president and the steadfast support his government has enjoyed in the UN Security Council (UNSC) from both Russia and China, which are permanent members of the UNSC and, therefore, have veto powers. Previously, Pillay had made an effort to temper her condemnation of the Syrian president by linking it to a condemnation of the crimes against humanity perpetrated (and even filmed!) by the foreign-backed mercenaries. 2
For example, on Friday, January 25, 2013, on CNN’s International News broadcast at noon 3, she was interviewed from Davos, Switzerland, (at the World Economic Forum, where high-level technocrats scheme about running the world’s economy for the next year on behalf of the 1%) by anchor, Hala Gorani, on the question of alleged and widespread human rights abuses in Syria.
While videos of the unfortunate families of refugees fleeing Syria were flashed upon the screen, Pillay indicated that she was increasingly frustrated by the failure of Russia and China (“and several other states”) to allow the United Nations Security Council to refer the request by 58 member countries of the United Nations for an investigation into the alleged human rights abuses by both sides in Syria to the ICC.
The January 25th CNN interview was only the latest of similar interviews of Pillay by CNN 4 and other mainstream media outlets, following the issue of a proposed ICC investigation into human rights abuses in Syria. So, why is this crusade on Pillay’s part important to CNN? Why does she get so much air time in the West? The answer is that governments and corporate media in the West are counting on Pillay to provide the same kind of pretext for regime change in Syria that she provide against the Gaddafi government of Libya.
Two very useful precedents for illegal, but so-called “humanitarian”, intervention by NATO were set by the United Nations in regards to Libya. The first was that the doctrine of the responsibility to protect was successfully invoked, for the very first time, as a legal grounds for over-riding the fundamental principle of national sovereignty as the basis of international law.
R2P holds that, if a government cannot protect the human rights of its own citizens, the international community may step in to do so. In the case of Libya, R2P was used to justify United Nations Resolution 1973, the motion that authorized NATO to create a no-fly zone over Libya. Resolution 1973 was perverted by NATO within hours into a full-blown military intervention for regime change in Libya that resulted in the deaths of thousands of Libyans, pogroms against black persons resident in Libya, the assassinations of Muammar Gaddafi and members of his family, massive infrastructure damage, the de facto partitioning of the country, and a failed state machine.
But the first precedent (above) could not have been realized without the fancy legal footwork executed in advance by the nimble Navi in demonizing Mouammar Gaddafi and his son, Saif, at the UN. The second precedent, then, was the initiative taken by the UN Human Rights Council, chaired by Pillay, in calling for an international inquiry into violence against civilians in Libya. This call for an inquiry led the International Criminal Court, acting in the interests of the US empire and other neo-colonial powers such as France, Italy, and Britain, to obtain an indictment against the late, former leader of Libya, Mouammar Gaddafi and his son, Saif, for alleged human rights abuses by the Libyan government against Libyan civilians. In fact, the entire bureaucracy of the United Nations was completely finessed by the Empire in using fabricated abuses of human rights of Libyan civilians as an excuse to delegitimize, unseat, and demonize the legitimate government of Libya so as to manoeuvre the National Transitional Council of Libya [NTC] (organized and supported by all of the western powers) into the position of being recognized internationally as the legitimate representative of the Libyan people. This manoeuvre, in turn, helped provide a further pretext for the NATO regime change operation in Libya.
The wholesale replacement of the official Libyan government representatives at the UN by those of the NTC was achieved in several rapid steps. First, on February 25, 2011, at an emergency meeting of the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC), representatives of more than 70 human rights NGO’s (non-governmental organizations) were assembled in Geneva, Switzerland, on a petition initiated by UN Watch (a pro-Israeli NGO) and the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) to hear a litany of accusations of human rights violations on the part of the Gaddafi government by Dr. Soliman Bouchuiguir, who spoke for the Libyan League for Human Rights (LLHR).
The LLHR was closely tied to the NTC and had, in fact, some executive members in common with it. No evidence of the human rights abuses that the Libyan government was alleged to have committed against Libyan civilians was ever entered as evidence. Libya was a member of the UNHCR but its membership had been temporarily suspended prior to the emergency meeting.
Therefore, it was not allowed to answer the charges levelled by the LLHR, an organization directly connected to the western-backed opposition. Navi Pillay, as UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, chaired the meeting. She is quoted as saying, “The Libyan leader must stop the violence now.” And she pointed out that Libya was a member of the Human Rights Council and pledged to respect human rights, and was also a State party to various international human rights treaties. 5 It was also at this meeting that “a statement (was) delivered on behalf of all of the Council’s independent human rights experts (who) endorsed the High Commissioner’s call for an international inquiry into the violence, stressing that the international community should “act without delay” to protect civilians from serious human rights violations.” 6 The UNHCR report was duly forwarded to the Security Council which formally suspended Libya from its seat on the UNHRC.
Shortly following the emergency meeting, Libya was prevented from appointing a new ambassador to the United Nations, following the defection of its two representatives at the UN to the opposition. 7 Despite having gone over to the opposition, the two defectors were granted “courtesy passes” allowing them access to the Security Council chamber where they delivered anti-Gaddafi remarks.
Libya responded by naming former Nicaraguan Foreign Minister (under the revolutionary Sandinista government of the 1980′s) Rev. Miguel D’Escoto Brockman as its new Permanent Representative to the UN. D’Escoto Brockman had also served as a former Secretary-General of the UN General Assembly. However, his attendance at the UN was blocked by Susan Rice, US Ambassador to the UN, because he was on a tourist visa to the USA and not a diplomatic visa. D’Escoto Brockman rightly criticized UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon of betraying the UN Charter and called the UN “a lethal weapon of the Empire.” 8
On March 28, 2011, Al Jazeera, the TV mouthpiece of the Qatari monarchy, an ally (with very deep pockets) of NATO in the Persian Gulf, first broadcast the Viagara libel. 9 In this narrative, which rivals the fantasies of the Kuwaiti incubator babies (a pretext for the First Gulf War) and of the Iraqi weapons of mass destruction (the pretext for the Second Gulf War), the Libyan government of Mouammar Gaddafi was accused of encouraging the mass rapes of Libyan civilian women by distributing the drug, Viagara, to its troops. There turned out to be no evidence whatsoever of this wild accusation.
But that did not prevent all the major mainstream media outlets of the West from repeating it. Nor did it deter Susan Rice and her boss, US Secretary of State, Hilary Clinton, from condemning Gaddafi. Finally, following the condemnation by Clinton, Luis Moreno-Ocampo, the chief prosecutor for the ICC at the time, issued an indictment (basically an arrest warrant) against Mouammar Gaddafi and his son, Saif, effectively turning them into pariahs and accused international war criminals.
There were three problems for the ICC and for Libyan civilians in indicting the Gaddafis, not the least of which was the lack of evidence. The other two were the ICC’s own record and the consequences of the Viagara libel. The ICC’s record was very sketchy to say the least. In his decade of tenure as chief prosecutor, twenty-nine Africans were indicted by Ocampo but only one was convicted and not on the original charges contained in the indictment.10 11 
 In every instance when the ICC, under his leadership, became involved with political leaders, the leaders indicted were always African and at odds with the foreign policy goals of the USA. It should be noted that the USA has not accepted the jurisdiction of the the court over its own citizens, who have immunity from ICC prosecution. In other words, the ICC is a one-way street along which the racist and neo-colonial goals of US foreign policy are driven in Africa, but the crimes of racism and neo-colonialism go unpunished. The ICC has never issued an indictment for war crimes or human rights abuses against the likes of George W. Bush, Tony Blair, Stephen Harper, Nikolas Sarkozy, and David Cameron, nor is it ever likely to do so.
Finally, the indictment issued for allegedly distributing Viagara to its troops was part of a racist campaign in the West suggesting falsely that the Gaddafi government had so little support among the people of Libya that the Libyan leader had to resort to hiring black mercenaries from Sub-Saharan Africa to retain his hold on power. The old shibboleth of black men raping light(er)-skinned women played very well, as would be expected, in the mainstream media of the USA, Britain, Canada, France, and other mainly white countries, where a latent pool of racism lays just below the surface of the consciousness of a certain part of the population and where an ersatz concern for the welfare of women is used as a rationale to wage war on foreign peoples, as in Afghanistan, and now in Mali. 12
The results for black Libyans (one-third of the total Libyan population) and the hundreds of thousands of black migrant workers resident in Libya were absolutely catastrophic, including mass arrests, beatings, thefts, kidnappings, torture, lynchings, and ethnic cleansing. For a thorough assessment of this chapter in NATO’s war of terror on Libya, please refer to Maximilian Forte’s excellent new book, Slouching Towards Sirte: NATO’s war on Libya and Africa, published by Baraka Books of Montreal.
Pillay was not just complicit in paving the way for a NATO military intervention in Libya. She previously established her international credentials as a servant of the US Empire in the aftermath of a US-sponsored proxy war of conquest in Rwanda. As President of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, she exercised power on behalf of the US victors (and their ex-patriate Tutsi proxy warriors) by dispensing a sub-standard form of “justice” to the losers (officials and supporters of the former majority Hutu government) . For a comprehensive account of that war and the humanitarian tragedy it caused, please see Robin Philpot’s, Rwanda 1994: Colonialism Dies Hard 13 and Michel Chussodovsky’s “The US was behind the Rwandan Genocide. Rwanda: Installing a US Protectorate in Central Africa.” 14
Similarly, she served as a justice of the International Criminal Court at the Hague (alongside prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo, mentioned above) dealing with a number of black leaders of countries who had run afoul of US foreign policy goals in Africa.
The Western-backed mercenary war for regime change in Syria began in early 2011. 15 It was formally funded at a meeting of the so-called “Friends of Syria” conference on April 1, 2012, in Istanbul, which was attended by Canadian Foreign Minister John Baird as well as representatives of about 70 countries. 16
What is less known, however, was that Canada was deeply involved in setting up the Friends of Syria group at a pre-conference meeting in Tunisia in December, 2011. 17 At the Istanbul conference, the participants established a division of labour regarding the mercenary war on Syria. The US committed to provide “communications equipment”, the absolute monarchs of Qatar and Saudi Arabia pledged vast sums of money, while Canada undertook to provide $8.5 million in humanitarian aid (to Syrian refugees) and in “opposition assistance.” 18
Sending mercenaries to fight for regime change within a sovereign country is a war crime, according to the Nuremberg Principles and the London Charter of 1945. It is also a violation of the very first article of the UN Charter. 19 As well, it amounts to interference in the internal affairs of a sovereign country, which sovereignty is the cornerstone of all international law. Even to threaten regime change in a sovereign country is a violation of Article 2 of the UN Charter. 20 Furthermore, all of the heinous crimes perpetrated by the western-backed mercenaries in Syria, some of which were videotaped by the mercenaries themselves for the entire world to see, and which include extralegal assassination of civilians, execution of military prisoners, destruction of civilian infrastructure, bombing public places (such as schools) and thereby killing and injuring civilians, and many more, are themselves violations of the Geneva Conventions on the conduct of war, not to mention the United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
At the same time as various western and Gulf states were waging this mercenary war on Syria, virtually all of them, including Canada, 21 had signed onto the UN and Arab League Six-Point Peace Plan for Syria which called for a Syrian-led, negotiated settlement of the crisis, notably without calling for the removal of Syrian President Assad. 22 Similarly, they had adopted a communiqué on June 1, 2012 in Geneva, advocating a political solution, involving the participation of the current government of Syria. 23 UN Special Envoys, Kofi Annan and Lakhtar Brahimi, were charged with facilitating the negotiated end of the crisis and engaged in shuttle diplomacy between Moscow, Iran, Egypt, Istanbul and many other capitals for many months. At the UN Security Council, Russia and China used their vetoes on at least three occasions to block further economic sanctions against Syria as well as resolutions authorizing a western military intervention in Syria.
As early as August 2011, Navi Pillay was engaged with the issue of human rights abuses in this theatre of war. Not surprisingly (given her track record), she completely ignored the UN Charter and international law and sided firmly with the western and Gulf states who were underwriting and organizing the undeclared mercenary war against Syria, while at the same professing support for the UN’s Six-Point Peace Plan. In August of 2011, she urged the Security Council to refer the issue of widespread human rights abuses in Syria to the ICC. 24
She repeated this call at the UN and in the media in December of 2011, several times more in 2012, and most recently in January of 2013, when, for example, she was interviewed by Hala Gorani on CNN. She also complained about the Russian and Chinese governments’ use of their Security Council vetoes to oppose resolutions targetting Syria. In her briefing to the UN General Assembly on February 13, 2012, for example, she stated her one-sided view that “the failure of the Security Council to agree on firm collective action appears to have emboldened the Syrian Government to launch an all-out assault in an effort to crush dissent with overwhelming force.” 25 And, in calling for the matter to be referred to the ICC for investigation, she unquestioningly and consistently has quoted the dubious casualty figures supplied by the foreign-backed Syrian opposition.26
We can now see why CNN and other western mainstream media are so interested in following the Navi Pillay story: as in Libya and Rwanda, where Navi Pillay was a player, the present narrative justifying western military intervention in Syria invokes the responsibility to protect the human rights of civilians, which allegedly cannot be guaranteed by the target government. Against the backdrop of ordinary civilians fleeing Syria in their hundreds of thousands (which did not occur before the start of the western-backed mercenary war), Navi Pillay is portrayed as being on the side of the angels.
Humanitarian intervention is a powerful tool in the West, where even people on the “left”, who should know better, fall for it. Take, for instance, the most recent petition by 58 countries to UN Secretary Ban Ki Moon to approach the Security Council to refer to the ICC an investigation into widespread human rights abuses in Syria. The petition was initiated behind closed doors by the USA and spearheaded at the United Nations by the UK, because of two issues. The first is the consternation (and surprise) of western states with the steadfast opposition of Russia and China at the Security Council to any such resolution, because those two veto-wielding powers learned the hard way, through their losses in Libya 27, that such an investigation would lead inexorably to an indictment by the ICC of President Assad and provide a pretext for a western military intervention in Syria. The second issue was that Syria never ratified the Treaty of Rome which established the International Criminal Court. Therefore, like the USA, its citizens cannot be prosecuted by it. These difficulties are formidable for the success of such a petition. Nonetheless, as in the case of Libya and Rwanda, creative sidestepping of the rule of international law is a specialty of legal counsellors of the empire such as Navi Pillay. The next few months will probably see her tirelessly working her tricks to achieve that end.
It should be noted, however, that the Syrian government responded directly to Pillay and the 58-country petition with a statement of its own on January 18, 2013, terming the initiative “the wrong approach.” 28 Instead, the Syrian government called, among other things, for an end to the foreign-backed mercenary war, the end of jihadist fatwas resulting in brutalities against civilians, and the lifting of sanctions.
The problems with the petition cited above did not faze the Canadians for Justice and Peace in the Middle East (CJPME). In its statement of January 15, 2013, 29 CJPME stated that it applauded the decision of 58 countries to ask the UN Security Council to refer the Syrian situation to the International Criminal Court (ICC) for investigation: ” ‘If the Security Council acts on the request, it will send a powerful signal to both the Syrian government and the opposition that war crimes and human rights violations cannot be committed with impunity,’ says CJPME President Thomas Woodley.” The statement also includes a reference to a report by Human Rights Watch that blames both the Syrian government and foreign-backed opposition with human rights abuses.
CJPME should know better. In fact, war crimes and human rights violations are committed continuously and with complete impunity by the western powers. The USA has invaded over sixty countries since the end of World War ll while the hands of the former colonial powers, stained in the blood of the people of Asia, Africa and Latin America, are once more reaching for the resources of Libya, Syria, and Mali. The continuing oppression of the Palestinian people is a due to western governments’ carte blanche attitude to Israeli aggression. Organizations such as Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, the National Endowment for Democracy have all provided the human rights figleaf for western interventions in Iraq, Libya, Rwanda, and many other countries, by repeating and circulating allegations of abuses of human rights, which, after the fact, are proven to be false.
Another group that should know better is the Canadian Lawyers for International Human Rights (CLAIHR). Two days before Muammar Gaddafi was taken prisoner, sodomized, and executed by Libyan “rebels” with the assistance of Western special forces on the ground, 30 Jillian Siskind, President of CLAIHR, was writing in The Mark and giving video interviews about the fact that Canadians should be proud of our country’s participation in military operations, such as in Libya, relating to the responsibility to protect. She wrote: “Canadians and our government should be proud of our contribution to international peace and security – not just our participation in the collective action of R2P, which attempts to bring greater security and a safer future to populations whose rights have been trampled upon, but also our leadership role in the great effort that resulted in the R2P doctrine. The principles that we set forth have now been established as an international norm. On this 10th anniversary of R2P, we should be celebrating our contribution to international law…” 31
It appears that there is a sort of collective amnesia amongst some circles in the West regarding military interventions. The military interventions in Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, and Libya, in every case, made things worse for the majority of civilians: massive infrastructure destruction, deaths in five to seven figures, homelessness, lawlessness (and lack of personal security), partition and/or failed state status, ethnic cleansing, birth defects (due to the use of depleted uranium shells), long-lasting psychological problems for children, and a worsening standard of living for the target country’s general population. No matter how much a failure the last intervention was in protecting the human rights of the civilians in the target country, those amnesiacs, such as the Canadian Lawyers for International Human Rights, are always chomping at the bit to begin the next.
During a recent visit on the part of the executive committee of the Hamilton Coalition To Stop The War to the three sitting New Democratic members of parliament for Hamilton, one of the MP’s asked, “Can you not see any possible case in which the doctrine of the responsibility to protect would be justified?”
The head of the HCSW delegation replied that, given the unequal distribution of power in the contemporary world, military interventions can only be mounted with the backing of the great powers of the world, who, of necessity, will pick and choose where to intervene (or not to intervene) based on their own national interests.
As the current international struggle over Syria unfolds with greater rapidity and danger – Patriot missile batteries in Turkey (which enable NATO to create a back-door, no-fly-zone over Syria); an Israeli airstrike on a Syrian research facility; US and British special forces on the ground co-ordinating with the foreign-backed mercenaries; the presence of a large US naval fleet in the Eastern Mediterranean, including at least one Canadian frigate; unsubtle NATO threats to seize Syrian chemical weapons; the Iranian government assertion that it regards an attack on Syria as an attack on Iran – Canadians need to be wary of crass appeals to their genuine humanitarian instincts posed by the Syrian refugee crisis and widespread abuse of human rights in Syria.
Navi Pillay, pretext-maker for imperial aggression, is almost within reach of her presidential target in Syria. Don’t fall for her tricks.
Ken Stone is a veteran anti-war and anti-racist activist and Treasurer of the Hamilton Coalition to Stop The War. (
1 ;
2 ;
3 ;
4 Pillay was previously interviewed on CNN on the subject of Syrian refugees on January 2, 2013;
5 UN News Centre, February 25, 2011, ;
6 ibid;
7Maximilian Forte, Slouching Towards Sirte: NATO’s war on Libya and Africa, Baraka Books, Montreal, 2012, page 248;
8ibid, page 249;
9ibid, page 253;
11 ;
12–women-of-timbuktu-remembering-their-dance-steps . Thanks to the French military intervention in Mali, we are led to believe that the status of women has been restored in Mali. In Afghanistan, we have been told by the Harper government of Canada, that the status of women there has been improved by NATO occupation. Actually, the standard of living of all Afghans has dramatically deteriorated during the eleven-year-old war which has seen an increasing number of self-immolations by desperate Afghan women unable to provide for their children ;
13 ;
15 The western military intervention in Syria was actually planned as early as 2007. Please see chapter 14, “NATO and the Levant: Lebanon and Syria”, of M. D. Nazemroaya’s new book, The Globalization of NATO, published by Global Research, 2012;
16 ;
17 ;
18 ;
19 ;
20 ibid;
21 ;
22 ;
23 ;
24 ;
25 ;
26 According to journalist Robert Fisk, the casualty figures jumped 15,000 in one week. Public lecture, Hamilton, Ontario, January 28, 2013;
27 Both Russia and China suffered from the overthrow of the Libyan government led by Muammar Gaddafi, not only in terms of the loss of their prestige in being hoodwinked by NATO’s abuse of UN Resolution 1973 (the no-fly-zone), but also in terms of business contracts and loans that were nullifed by the new Libyan government. Public lecture, Dr. Atif Kubursi, September 13, 2012, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. Audio record:; video record:
28 ;
29 ;
30 Maximilian Forte, in a radio interview with Phil Taylor on the “Taylor Report”, CIUT 89.5 (University of Toronto Radio, January 28, 2013);
31Jillian Siskind, The Mark, October 19, 2011.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Arab Spring Pays Back in Dollars

by Roy Tov
Sunday, September 16th, 2012 Arabs Answer American Violence

Ambassador Christopher Stevens
USA Ambassador Christopher Stevens Killed in Libya
Once upon a time, there was a Kingdom of Justice and Light. The kings served there in periods of four years and insisted on being called “Mr. President.” That was true until the year 2000, when the son of a former king was chosen to office by the voice of a single Justice who had been appointed by his father. From that moment onwards, it had become pretty close to a formal kingdom. Yet, they didn’t define themselves as such; they claimed that they were the world’s most powerful country, and prided themselves on their democracy. They weren’t exactly a democracy of the people; they left such a title to backward countries like North Korea. They were a democracy of corporations. These organizations were recognized by the kingdom as judicial persons, and were those guiding and funding the government’s behavior. Many of these soulless persons were rather innocent, busying themselves in the science of preparation of greasy hamburgers and similarly useless tasks. However, the largest and most powerful among them made money out of war. For over half a century they had run amok around the globe attacking any target they knew would not react. This created jobs at home and kept the powerful military busy and happy. Once upon a time, there was a Kingdom of Justice and Light; of course, it wasn’t exactly a kingdom, justice was reserved to corporations, and the only lights were the interrogation lamps constantly aimed at the people by their paranoiac, illegitimate government. Once upon a time, this looked like an unbeatable scheme; then, things changed.

Two Wars

americanconsulatebenghaziIn Afghanistan, American got luckier. They completed a survey that had been initiated in the 19th century by Russians and Britons during the Great Game, and discovered huge reserves of rare earth elements (for details see USA answers Europe Attempt to Secure Rare Earth Elements and Hidden Rare Earth Elements War Heats Up). American corporations and their puppet-regime in Kabul are planning their exploitation; accordingly, the USA is unlikely to leave Afghanistan until the ores are taken away. I have no doubt the USA would be utterly surprised to find that as soon as they begin robbing the ores from the Afghani people, a new guerrilla war will erupt. Soon afterwards, Americans will begin missing the Taliban regime.
A few years ago, I read an article claiming that the current century would also be an “American Century.” The statistics supporting this are amazing; since its foundation, the USA has fought over 500 wars (see American Led Apocalypse). The USA is beyond any doubt the most violent country in human history. This new and brave “American Century” begun accordingly with two major wars, in Iraq and Afghanistan. On paper, both were American victories on the meek. Yet, on September 4, 2012, The New York Times, reported “Iran has resumed shipping military equipment to Syria over Iraqi airspace” (see Eastern Limit of Western Power). Iran’s capability of doing so was the direct result of the American attack on Iraq, which left the latter without an air force. Slowly, the American victory on Iraq is turning out to be something different. Of course, the American Administration would be the last organization on the planet to admit that.

The two first major wars of this century clearly sign this century won’t be an American one. Both are widely considered illegitimate and have damaged American position. The third war confirmed that.

The Third War

CNN in Spanish is unwatchable. It inherited the slightly propagandistic style of its English Big Brother. This could be bearable on small amounts. However, when combined with the weirdest anchors on earth the effect is grotesque. Why should an anchor shout? Why should another one triplicate every “r” he founds along the way? (Afterwards he stops for a sec, to let the audience enjoy the effect). Yet, while in Bolivia this is my most direct access to American mainstream media. In the aftermath of the attack on the American Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, I watched the CNN. “Just this tiny item,” I promised myself, feeling slightly nauseous. It paid off immediately.

“They didn’t shoot the ambassador. He was safe. He suffocated to death.”

This is the summary of the silly analysis offered by a Spanish-speaking American; during his speech, the anchor kept distracting the audience with unlikely antics. The American was trying to diminish the success of the attack. Bizarre on the verge of self-delusional, the CNN failed to mention that Benghazi had been the first conquest of the mercenaries that had ousted Kaddafi. Even the term “Arab Spring,” the formal name of the third major war of this century was barely mentioned. Make no mistake; this is a major war, despite its feeble results. Rulers were changed in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, and Yemen. Egypt is the clearest failure. The revolution there led to the exchange of Mubarak—an American puppet—by President Mohamed Morsi, who is affiliated to the Muslim Brotherhood. Mass protests took place in Algeria, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Morocco, and Sudan; minor ones in Lebanon, Mauritania, Oman, Saudi Arabia, Djibouti, and Western Sahara. The instigators of the events were hit back almost immediately—in Egypt—and are about to be hit again in other locations.

There is no doubt that the “Arab Spring” is a string of carefully coordinated attacks by the Americans on the Arab World. It has been denounced so repeatedly by Russia and China, which had provided plenty of proofs, including convincing testimony of made-up events and photographs by the American media. Not only the Western media ignores these accusations, but it also misleads the public. In the specific case of Libya, it presented the revolution as a popular uprising against Kaddafi.

In February 2011, we were told by Western media that the Arab Spring had reached Libya. However, those paying attention to details, noticed something odd in the reports: the so called “popular protests” began by a group of mercenaries taking control of Benghazi, near the Egyptian border. They have entered Libya from Egypt. In May the rebels took the city of Misrata and things began looking bad for Muammar Kaddafi’s government. On, August 23, the rebels took control Bab al-Aziziya, the government complex in Tripoli. Kaddafi escaped, but shortly after he was caught and assassinated. Instead of a popular rebellion, we watched the advance of an unknown infantry army backed up by the air force of Nato’s Terror Marshals. In the West, the rebels became known as the “National Transitional Council” and were recognized as Libya’s legal government for unclear reasons; after all they have not been elected by the people. Opposing the barbaric attacks of NATO on civilians were China, Russia and Venezuela.
River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

What’s Next for Libya?

posted by Steve Lendman @ 12:23 AM

My PhotoNATO’s “responsibility to protect” (R2P) was subterfuge to wage war. Months of terror bombing left Libya a charnel house.

Africa’s most developed country was ravaged, not liberated. Protracted struggle continues. Expect it to persist for years.

When is war not war? It’s when mass killing and destruction are called the right thing. It’s also when terrorizing and traumatizing an entire population continues unaddressed.

Libya breaking into separate countries after NATO intervention
Libya was developed and peaceful until NATO intervened. It arrived on cruise missiles, bombs, shells, other munitions, depleted and enriched uranium, other terror weapons, fifth column infiltrators, and media scoundrel complicity, as well as coverup and denial.

No nation or alliance may interfere in the internal affairs of another except in self-defense if attacked. NATO R2P authority was Trojan Horse deception. Crimes of war and against humanity followed. They continue out-of-control.

NATO’s still involved. Thousands of US forces guard key oil facilities, ports, and perhaps other strategic sites. Occasional air attacks occur. NATO warships occupy Libya’s ports. US, Italian, French, and perhaps other forces are involved. January reports from Misrata said Apache helicopters slaughtered rebels trying to scale Brega oil platforms.

Insurgents battle each other and Green Resistance for control. Frequent clashes leave rivals and civilians dead or injured. Militias control local areas and neighborhoods. Thousands of Gaddafi loyalists and Black African guest workers were murdered or held captive and tortured. Dark-skinned Libyans and guest workers are especially threatened.
On October 23, Obama duplicitously “congratulated the people of Libya on today’s declaration of liberation. After four decades of brutal dictatorship and eight months of deadly conflict, the Libyan people can now celebrate their freedom and the beginning of a new era of promise.”

He’s a frontman for power. He’s an inveterate liar and war criminal multiple times over. He added another imperial trophy to colonize, plunder and exploit. Keeping it’s another matter. Libya’s one of history’s great crime. Green Resistance struggles to restore Jamahiriya rule.

Obama matched the worst of Bush and exceeded him. Libyans, Afghans, Iraqis, and Syrians revile him. So do millions of others for good reason. Hopefully one day they’ll have the last word.

Qaddhafi could have got on a flight to Cuba;
but he died fighting in defence of Libya

Liberation never comes easily or quickly. For sure, it’s worth protracted struggle to achieve, no matter the cost.
Gaddafi was no coward or quitter. Neither are Libyans and others throughout North Africa, the Middle East, and Central Asia.

Their liberating struggle won’t end until America’s imperial scourge ends, and NATO’s consigned to the dustbin of history. Humanity depends on it.

NATO’s sole new millennium accomplishment consists of endless unwinnable wars. Coalition partners eventually tire and pull out.

America may end up isolated. It excels in making enemies and losing friends.

The battle for Iraq continues. Afghanistan’s war was lost years ago. Libya’s also though political Washington, coalition partners, media scoundrels, and NATO won’t admit it.

The alliance wages lawless imperial aggression against nonbelligerent countries. Yugoslavia was first, then Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya.

Daily terror bombings massacred tens of thousands of Libyans. Insurgent gangs continue committing shocking atrocities. Libya’s revolutionary struggle won’t end until Green Resistance purges them eliminates NATO’s control.

Gaddafi’s murder investigation was whitewashed. Killers don’t judge themselves guilty.

In mid-February, a UN News Centre release “welcomed….Libya’s new electoral authorities.” It urged “free elections” be held as soon as possible.

On February 12, members of Libya’s so-called Higher National Electoral Commission (HNEC) were sworn in days after National Transitional Council (NTC) officials adopted electoral laws to choose National Congress members. A 200-member constituent assembly is planned.

The Jamahiriya News Agency (JANA) quoted HNEC’s Othman al-Kajiji saying last week in June “elections will be held on schedule as set by the constitutional declaration.”

So-called elections install powerless puppets subservient to Washington, Britain, France, and other rogue NATO partners. Free Libya won’t exist until loyalists regain it.

Last September, Security Council Resolution 2009 established a UN Support Mission in Libya (UNSMIL). Its mandate belies its mission.

Allegedly it’s tasked to “restor(e) public security and the rule of law, promot(e) inclusive political dialogue and national reconciliation, and (help) the (NTC) embark on the drafting of a new constitution and on laying the foundation for new elections.”

In fact, it’s part of NATO’s imperial occupation. UN Special Representative for Libya’s Ian Martin heads it. He’s Ban Ki-moon’s Post-Conflict for Libya Special Advisor. He serves Washington and other NATO allies, not Libyans.

They face enormous challenges to overcome. They include imperial occupation, destabilization, divisiveness, and violence ravaging the country. Media scoundrels report nothing. Libyans fear what’s next.

A view of the deserted town of Tawergha, Libya,
on September 4, 2011.

Insurgents battle for local control. Death squads eliminate rivals and other targeted victims. Tawergha residents were terrorized last year. Their nightmare continues.

Thousands were killed or exiled to refugee camps. Raids continue. Arrests, torture and deaths result. Human rights atrocities are horrific. Other areas are targeted. Libya’s a raging cauldron. No central control exists.

NATO intends the same fate for Syria and elsewhere. Installing Western puppets is planned. In Libya, they got more than they bargained for. The same holds for Afghanistan and Iraq. Nonetheless, conflicts and violence continue. With more planned, the entire region’s threatened.

Libya was ravaged and destroyed. Tens of thousands were killed, many more injured and displaced. Violence, fear and poverty replaced Gaddafi’s social state. No wonder most Libyans supported him. No wonder they revile NATO.

The alliance hailed a successful mission accomplished. US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta called the war an “inspiring revolution.” He added that Washington helped “creat(e) a unique alliance against tyranny and for freedom.”

Libyans know otherwise. Daily terror replaced peace and calm. None of it shows signs of ending. No one knows who’s next to die. Everyone suffers. Kafkaesque reality plagues the country. Few doubt who’s responsible.

In February 2011, the UN Human Rights Council established the International Commission of Inquiry on Libya. In March 2012, it reported crimes of war and against humanity committed by both sides.

It said insurgents “committed serious violations, including war crimes and breaches of international human rights law, the latter continuing at the time of the present report. The Commission found these violations to include unlawful killing, arbitrary arrest, torture, enforced disappearance, indiscriminate attacks, and pillage.”

It didn’t address horrific NATO war crimes. Instead it said participating nations “conducted a highly precise campaign with a demonstrable determination to avoid civilian casualties.” It added that further investigations are recommended to evaluate its effectiveness.

Thousands of bombing missions reigned death and destruction for months. Civilians were willfully targeted. Western and Qatari Special Forces aided insurgent violence. Coverup and denial whitewash NATO crimes. Washington orchestrated and directed them. Gaddafi’s Libya no longer exists.

On January 21, Press TV cited the London-based pan-Arab daily Asharq Alawsat saying Washington sent 12,000 soldiers to Libya. They landed in Brega. They came to control key oil fields, facilities and ports.

A Final Comment

Wherever NATO intervenes, death, destruction, and human misery follow. Libya’s disintegrating in chaos and violence. Tribes and rebel gangs battle for dominance. NTC control’s impossible. A new semi-autonomous Cyrenaica region was declared. It extends from Sirte to Egypt’s border. It holds about two-thirds of Libya’s oil.

Oil rich Fezzan region also seeks independence. Tripolitania remains. Its own oil fields lie close to Tripoli. Syrian insurgents are being trained there.

Last year, some observers predicted balkanization. In early March, factional Eastern leaders discussed recognizing Tripoli as Libya’s political capital and Benghazi its financial one – sort of like a Washington/New York division.

Given ongoing violence, instability and lawlessness, perhaps June elections won’t happen as planned. Establishing legitimate rule’s impossible. Restoring peace and calm won’t happen soon. It may take many years to accomplish.

Dozens of insurgent factions remain heavily armed. Operating independently, they won’t integrate into a national army. Clashes continue across mostly Northern areas. Thousands of Gaddafi supporters languish in prisons.

Green Resistance fighters struggle for freedom. So do major tribes against puppet governance. Libya’s so violent, dysfunctional, and unstable, neighboring countries are threatened.

Mali’s late March military coup appears fallout from Libya. It may be replicated elsewhere in North Africa and perhaps beyond. Niger’s also endangered. There’s more involved than meets the eye, including controlling regional resources. Besides oil, Libya, Mali, and Niger have valuable uranium deposits. Washington seeks control.

America and the IMF are involved in Nigerian violence. Western oil giants largely control its oil. However, China made inroads with exploration and infrastructure deals. It wants more. That puts Beijing at odds with Washington and other Western interests.

Currency wars are also at issue. Nigeria’s foreign reserves are 80% in dollars. The rest are in euros and Sterling. Russia, China, India, Iran, and other countries increasingly want less dollar dependence. Moving away enough threatens it as the dominant world reserve currency. Washington’s determined to prevent it. Succeeding’s another matter.

The more China becomes a major Nigeria player, the less dominant dollars in the country become. Destabilizing violence may be involved to prevent it. It’s too early to know for sure but bears watching.

At issue is controlling North Africa, the Middle East, and Central Asia. Washington seeks global dominance, especially over resource rich areas. Independence and freedom depend on preventing it.

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at 

Also visit his blog site at and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Out of Control Violence in Libya – One Libyan in three wants return to authoritarian rule

by Stephen Lendman

My PhotoWherever NATO intervenes, massacres, mass destruction, and unspeakable horrors and human misery follow.
Once Africa’s most developed country, Libya today’s a ravaged, out-of-control charnel house. Tens of thousands died. Multiples more were injured, made homeless, and forcibly displaced.

Terror now stalks Libyans living in fear. Protracted conflict continues. Violence and instability rage. Expect no end for years. Washington’s-led NATO war is one of history’s great crimes. Colonization, occupation, plunder and exploitation were planned.

America got another bloodstained imperial trophy. Keeping it’s another matter. Green Resistance continues its liberating struggle.

Amnesty International’s (AI) New Report
Better late than never explaining NATO’s legacy. AI’s 2011 account misreported “The Battle for Libya.” It pointed fingers the wrong way. It blamed Gaddafi for NATO aggression. It falsely accused him of “kill(ing) and injur(ing) scores of unarmed protesters.”

It added “serious violations of international humanitarian law (IHL), including war crimes, and gross human rights violation, which point to the commission of crimes against humanity.”

Before Western-backed killer gangs arrived, Libya had peace and calm. AI blamed Gaddafi for their crimes. Its new report paints an entirely different picture, but still falls way short of truth and full disclosure. Titled, “Militias Threaten Hopes for New Libya,” it discusses pervasive violent lawlessness.
It doesn’t explain illegitimate National Transitional Council (NTC) authority or NATO’s illegal aggression against a nonbelligerent country. International law’s clear. AI knows it.

No nation may interfere in the internal affairs of another except in self-defense if attacked. NATO claimed responsibility to protect authority as Trojan Horse deception for war. Crimes of war and against humanity followed.

They continue out-of-control. NATO’s still involved. Thousands of US forces invaded to guard key oil facilities. Occasional air attacks occur. NATO warships occupy Libya’s ports. US, Italian, French, and perhaps other forces are involved. Reports from Misrata in January said Apache helicopters slaughtered rebel insurgents trying to scale Brega oil platforms.

Killer gangs rage out-of control. Frequent clashes kill civilians and rival insurgents. Militias control local areas and neighborhoods. Thousands of Gaddafi loyalists and Black African guest workers were murdered or held captive and tortured.

“Militias….continue to seize and detain people, outside any legal framework, and hold them in secret detention centers….” Thousands have no way to challenge out-of-control lawlessness or escape from brutal torture.
Detainees AI interviewed described their harrowing experience. They were:

  • suspended in contorted positions;beaten with whips, rifle butts, cables, plastic hoses, metal chains, bars, and wooden sticks;
  • electro-shocked with live wires and taser-like weapons;
  • burned; and
  • threatened with rape.

Medical reports confirmed their accounts. With rare exceptions, detainees aren’t tried or given access to lawyers. Several said they confessed to uncommitted crimes to end pain. Others were too scared to speak. NATO and NTC stooges know what’s going on and do nothing.

“(T)he NTC-led transitional government appears to have neither the authority nor the political will to rein in the militias. (They’re) unwilling to recognize the scale of militia abuses, at most acknowledging individual cases despite the mounting evidence of patterns of grave, widespread abuses in many parts of the country.”

As a result, ongoing torture and mistreatment continue. AI also exaggerated Gaddafi era crimes and ignored his mass public support. At the end, it was overwhelming, and today most Libyans yearn for him back.

NATO and illegitimate NTC officials spurn human rights and international law principles. Scheduled elections are cover for imperial occupation. Crimes of war and against humanity won’t be punished. As a result, they continue daily.

Dark-skinned Libyans are especially threatened. Thousands in Tawargha and elsewhere were forcibly displaced. They still can’t return, and their homes were looted and burned. As a result, those not held captive are in “poorly resourced” camps in Benghazi, Tripoli and elsewhere.

Many other Mshashiya and Qawalish tribe members, as well as Sirte, Bani Walid, and other residents, remain threatened by killer gangs. Revenge killings and other abuses continue. However, Green Resistance struggles to liberate Libya and restore Jamahiriya rule.

AI visited Libya in January and February 2012. Its researched focused in and around Tripoli, al-Zawiya, the Nafoussa Mountains, Misrata, Sirte and Benghazi.

They visited 11 detention centers in central and western Libya under insurgent gangs control. In at least 10, detainees were tortured and mistreated. AI interviewed them, those released, facility administrators, doctors and other hospital staff, relatives of people killed in custody, militia members, and NTC officials.

Exact numbers of detainees held and mistreated aren’t known. However, thousands remain imprisoned. ICRC representatives said they “visited over 8,500 detainees in about 60 places of detention.” Most were held in and around Tripoli and Misrata.

In February, NTC stooges held another 2,400. Nearly all current and former detainees AI interviewed said warrants didn’t authorize their arrests. They were extrajudicial and arbitrary. Self-appointed “judicial committees” function ad hoc. Defense lawyers aren’t present. Coercion, including torture and other severe treatment, force unjustified self-incrimination.

Many detainees said they were held at multiple locations. Some were secret. AI witnessed insurgents beating and threatening them, including some whose release were ordered.

One man said he was forced to lie on his back, hands and feet tied to the frame. “In this position, (he) was beaten with fists on (his) face. Then they beat me with a plastic hose on my feet.”

“Later, I had to turn around face-down and was tied to the bed. In that position, I was beaten again with a hose on my back and on the head. I was also subjected to electric shocks to various parts of my body including my left arm and chest.”

Others described similar experiences. Medical reports confirmed them. Since September 2011, AI confirmed at least 12 detainee deaths. Forensic evidence showed extreme abuse. NTC officials knew and do nothing, even when family members filed complaints.

Last September, they promised “to bring any armed groups under official authorities and (to) fully investigate any incidents brought to (their) attention.”

According to AI, “(t)his pledge has not been fulfilled. As long as defense lawyers and judicial authorities have no access to thousands of (detainees, they) remain held without trial or any means to challenge the legality of their detention….”

Moreover, extrajudicial killings occur. Investigations are announced but not conducted. Violence, impunity, and injustice continue. Libyans felt safe under Gaddafi. Occupation now terrorizes them.
Responsibility lies with NATO’s killing machine, puppet NTC stooges, and recruited killer gangs.
Today’s Libya is charnel house hell. It’s the same wherever NATO intervenes. Afghans, Iraqis, Syrians, and other victims know its horrors. As a result, their liberating struggles continue.

One Libyan in three wants return to authoritarian rule

Alistair Dawber

Almost a year after the start of the Libyan uprising that led to the ousting and killing of Colonel Muammar Gaddafi, new research suggests more than a third of its citizens would rather return to being ruled by a strongman than embrace democracy.

Despite thousands of deaths in the revolt against Colonel Gaddafi’s 40-year rule, fewer than a third of Libyans would welcome democracy, according to the study published by the Institute of Human Sciences, at the University of Oxford, and Oxford Research International.

Libya is traditionally a tribal society and there are concerns that the vacuum created by Colonel Gaddafi’s removal in October could lead to clashes between the factions that toppled him. In recent weeks, medical and human-rights groups have complained that the situation in parts of country is getting out of control.

The deaths of 12 detainees who lost their lives after being tortured by the various militias running law and order in towns and cities across country are documented in an Amnesty International report released today. The study follows last month’s decision by Médecins sans Frontières to halt operations in Misrata after being asked by officials to treat prisoners midway through torture sessions, allowing authorities to abuse the victims again.

Still, the survey found 35 per cent would still like a strong leader in five years’ time, although more than two-thirds wanted some say in future governance.

“Although there appears to be a push for an early election, the population seems to be happy with the National Transitional Council [NTC],” Christoph Sahm, director of Oxford Research International, said.

“Perhaps more significantly, Libyan people have not yet developed trust towards political parties, preferring a return of one-man rule. Yet they have also resoundingly said they want a say in how their country is run, which suggests Libyans who have had autocratic rule for decades lack the knowledge of how a democracy works and need more awareness of the alternatives to autocratic government.”
While trust in the NTC will be welcomed by Western backers – 81 per cent of Libyans expressed faith in the new administration that helped defeat Colonel Gaddafi – 16 per cent said they were ready to resort to violence for political ends.

Tortured: Abdellatif Mohamed Iyad Zbaida shows off his foot after
 he allegedly abused the militia groups in captivity.
Another person in the prison camp in Misratah show their
 wounds after he was allegedly beaten with whips and various cables.

Photo: Amnesty International

The figures are borne out by the Amnesty report, ‘Militias threaten hopes for new Libya,’ which points to evidence of war crimes being committed against Gaddafi loyalists. Its authors found that torture or ill-treatment was being perpetrated in 10 out of 11 detention centres they visited, with several prisoners saying they had offered false confessions to rape and other offences simply to end their ordeal.
The bodies of the 12 men who died were covered in bruises, wounds and cuts, Amnesty said, and some had fingernails and toenails pulled out.

“Militias in Libya are largely out of control and the blanket impunity they enjoy only encourages further abuses and perpetuates instability and insecurity,” said Amnesty’s Donatella Rovera. “”Militias with a record of abuse of detainees should simply not be allowed to hold anyone and all detainees should be immediately transferred to authorised detention facilities under the control of the National Transitional Council.”

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Liberation of Libya accomplished with demolition of a monument of Gamal Abdel Nasser in Benghazi

A Libyan  military brigade demolished the late Egyptian leader Gamal Abdel Nasser’s monument set up by former Libyan regime in Benghazi in Abdel Nasser Street Benghazi. The monument was destroyed  by bulldozers and hammers.

He and Wisam ibn Humayd, an adviser to President of NTC Mustafa Abdeljalil told the solidarity news agency that our presence here is to protect citizens and secure the demolition without chaos, but we have nothing to with the demolition
تمثال جمال عبد الناصر في بنغازى 
تم اليوم هدم تمثال جمال عبد الناصر في الشارع المسمى بأسمه في بنغازي والذي تغير لشارع الاستقلال #libya #benghazi

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Gaddafi’s Son Says Libyan People will Wipe Out Ruling Gangs

Local Editor

Slain Libyan leader Moammar Gaddafi’s son Saadi said Friday that “a nationwide rebellion is brewing against the country’s new rulers,” vowing to return to his homeland soon.

Speaking to Al-Arabiya by telephone from neighboring Niger, Saadi said that “seventy percent of Libyans are not satisfied with the current situation,” adding that “the Libyan people are being ruled by gangs.”

Moreover, he pointed out that “there is a rebellion that is going on day after day, and there will be a rebellion in the entire country.”

“There will come a day when the Libyan people will be capable of wiping out these gangs,” Saadi Gaddafi further said in reference to the National Transitional Council. Yet, he promised that after his return “I will try to make sure that there are no reprisals or revenge operations.”

The NTC responded to this statement by renewing its call to the Niger authorities to extradite Saadi Kadhafi.

“The NTC requests to the government of Niger to immediately hand over Saadi and other fugitives to the Libyan authorities to maintain its interests and relations with the Libyan people,” spokesman Mohamed Nasr Al-Harizi said in a statement.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

The Syrian Crucible

The Syrian Crucible
“Democracy promotion” and regime change in the Middle East
by , February 06, 2012
The arrest and pending trial of foreign “democracy activists” in Egypt on charges they violated laws prohibiting funding by foreign governments of NGOs has caused an uproar in Washington. Secretary of state Hillary Clinton has publicly warned Cairo this endangers the $1.55 billion in aid the US is supposed to shell out this year, but the Egyptians don’t seem all that impressed. “The government will not hesitate to expose foreign schemes that threaten the stability of the homeland,” said Ms. Abu el-Naga speaking on behalf of the Egyptian government. Al Ahram, the state newspaper, reporting on this, added “she is betting on the true essence of the Egyptian people to come together during crisis.”

And they are making a very good bet, since the American government is widely reviled in Egypt for supporting dictator Hosni Mubarak all those years: indeed, the indignant Hillary supported him up until the very last moment, even as Egyptians of all persuasions were pouring into the streets demanding his resignation – and his head.

In America, restrictions on foreign funding of political groups and nonprofit institutions is even stricter than in Egypt. Nonprofits acting as conduits for foreign money in the US must register as agents of a foreign power, and detail their activities and all interactions with foreign nationals and governments.

In short, the US adheres to one standard within its own borders, but disallows those same standards when applied to itself overseas. This is typical behavior for Washington, and just one of the reasons why we’re hated everywhere we go. The State Department portrays the crackdown as an attempt by the military junta to cling to power in spite of a pledge to yield to a democratically elected government, and yet according to the New York Times even the “human rights” groups on the US dole say:

“[T]hey believe the ruling generals may genuinely suspect what they have described as ‘foreign hands’ stirring up trouble on the street. Speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss the subject, a former general close to the ruling military council insisted that Washington was indeed seeking to destabilize Egypt by financing these groups.”

What if a foreign government decided that American election laws are “undemocratic” because, for example, they effectively disallow third parties, and are routinely manipulated by incumbents to ensure their reelection – and decided to massively fund a campaign to change those laws? They would be shut down quickly, of that there can be little doubt. To say nothing of foreign entities funding violent street demonstrations, as US-funded NGOs have done in the case of various “color revolutions” in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet republics of Central Asia. How many Muslim and Arab charities have been raided in the US, their leaders prosecuted on “terrorism” charges? Yet when the Egyptians did the same in their own country, the Americans pointed to this as an attack on “civil society.”

Under the rubric of the National Endowment for Democracy, and USAID, Washington ships billions of US tax dollars overseas to promote the work of government-funded NGOs, in effect creating the American equivalent of the old Soviet Comintern. With its agents ensconced in “civil society” all over the world, Washington uses these groups to pursue its foreign policy agenda of “regime change” in countries whose rulers are insufficiently subservient to American aims. We saw this during the Bush era, when various “color revolutions” from Ukraine to Kyrgyzstan were sparked by US-funded –and-trained groups. The US strategy is clearly to co-opt rather than oppose the revolutionary upsurge and use it as a means to advance American interests in the region, but this raises two questions:

1) Who and what are we backing, and 2) Is this a boon or a bane for those suffering under the dictatorship of, say, Bashar al-Assad of Syria? As Jacob Heilbrunn, writing in The National Interest, puts it:
“Apparently the State Department has financed Syrian groups and television programs attacking the Assad regime. U.S. diplomatic cables, the Post says, reveal that the State Department has disbursed at least $6 million to a group called the Movement for Justice and Development–a grouping of Syrian exiles living in London.

“The import of this move seems clear: President Obama is supporting, much as his predecessor, George W. Bush did, regime change in Syria. Regime change may, or may not, be in America’s interest. The Assad dictatorship, father and son, has been an ugly one. But what would replace it? Does Obama know? Does he have a clear read on the exiles in London (some of whom are apparently former members of the Muslim Brotherhood) that America has been supporting? The record of American assistance to such groups has not always been a happy one.
“Another problem is that by intruding into Syrian domestic politics, the administration legitimizes the regime’s claims that it is fighting foreign enemies intent on subverting the home land. For make no mistake: subversion is exactly what Obama is practicing. He is aiding a group that seeks to topple the current Syrian government.”

In the Western media, the Syrian narrative is all about how helpless protesters are being massacred by government forces, but the reality is quite different, as this report by the Arab League monitoring mission makes clear. Of course we didn’t hear much about this report when it was released: anything that goes against the Official Narrative is summarily dropped into the Memory Hole and never seen again. Pepe Escobar notes:

“The report is adamant. There was no organized, lethal repression by the Syrian government against peaceful protesters. Instead, the report points to shady armed gangs as responsible for hundreds of deaths among Syrian civilians, and over one thousand among the Syrian army, using lethal tactics such as bombing of civilian buses, bombing of trains carrying diesel oil, bombing of police buses and bombing of bridges and pipelines.”

The report itself states:

“The Mission determined that there is an armed entity that is not mentioned in the protocol. This development on the ground can undoubtedly be attributed to the excessive use of force by Syrian Government forces in response to protests that occurred before the deployment of the Mission demanding the fall of the regime. In some zones, this armed entity reacted by attacking Syrian security forces and citizens, causing the Government to respond with further violence. In the end, innocent citizens pay the price for those actions with life and limb.”

Who or what is this “armed entity not mentioned in the protocol” – or in many of the news reports on events in Syria? Where do they get their arms? Stratfor says mostly from Lebanon, but there is also the border with Turkey:

“Supply routes emanating from Lebanon are the most critical to the FSA, as they run closest to critical opposition strongholds in and around the capital and in the Sunni-majority cities of Homs and Hama. The porous Syrian-Turkish border is the safest for the FSA to cross. Ankara has already established several refugee camps for Syrians on the Turkish border and has been hosting the FSA and Syrian National Council leaderships. Foreign covert assistance to the FSA is also likely taking place on the Turkish side of the Syrian border, where stockpiles can be protected and Turkish armed forces can provide some cover for FSA rebels moving to and from Syria.” columnist and former intelligence officer Phil Giraldi is more explicit:

“Unmarked NATO warplanes are arriving at Turkish military bases close to Iskenderun on the Syrian border, delivering weapons from the late Muammar Gaddafi’s arsenals as well as volunteers from the Libyan Transitional National Council who are experienced in pitting local volunteers against trained soldiers, a skill they acquired confronting Gaddafi’s army. Iskenderun is also the seat of the Free Syrian Army, the armed wing of the Syrian National Council. French and British special forces trainers are on the ground, assisting the Syrian rebels while the CIA and U.S. Spec Ops are providing communications equipment and intelligence to assist the rebel cause, enabling the fighters to avoid concentrations of Syrian soldiers.”

The Libyan “National Transitional Council” announced its support to the Syrian rebels, and sent 600 fighters to the Turkish border. Financed and supported by Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey, the “Free Syrian Army” is intent on sparking a sectarian war, pitting Sunnis against Alawites and Christians. Their “Abu Bakr Brigade, which originated in Libya, and is said to be recruited from Al Qaeda, is posting anti-Alawite videos as part of their propaganda operation. This group has claimed responsibility for various attacks on Iranian targets, notably blowing up an Iranian military aircraft carrying 302 soldiers in 2003. The rebels are especially angry over what they characterize as growing Iranian influence in Syria, another factor that frames their cause in sectarian terms.

As Egypt falls into the Muslim Brotherhood’s embrace, and the US backs purportedly “moderate Islamists” in Syria and elsewhere, the fate of Christians and secularists in the region is increasingly problematic. The Egyptians see what is going on in Syria, and are trying to prevent the US-sponsored chaos from spreading

Proponents of “soft power” often point to it as a peaceful alternative to the application of “hard power,” but the reality is that the former is just the prelude to the latter. “Democracy promotion” sets the stage for military intervention by first providing the rationale for regime-change and secondly providing the personnel. The Syrian rebel radio station, headquartered in London, has received millions of our tax dollars, while our spooks have been training and arming them. The line between “soft” and “hard” power is increasingly difficult to ascertain.

When the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan, the US backed the Afghan mujahideen – dubbed “freedom-fighters” by President Reagan. This was the cradle out of which crept al-Qaeda. What new monsters are we creating in the Syrian crucible?

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Militias battle it out in Libyan capital case you missed it: Will 2012 Bring Tribal War to Libya?
In case you missed it: Gordon Duff Calling for unity??? What Time is It?
In case you missed it: On Sabir Nureddin’s alternative strategy for liberation of Libya

Militias battle it out in Libyan capital

Published Wednesday, February 1, 2012

Rival militias engaged in a gun battle near office buildings and a five-star hotel in the center of the Libyan capital on Wednesday, underscoring how volatile the country still is three months on from Muammar Gaddafi’s death.
A Reuters reporter said exchanges of both heavy and light weapons could be heard coming from the Tripoli district of El-Saadi beach, a stretch of Mediterranean coast overlooked by office skyscrapers and the Marriott Hotel.

Ambulance sirens could be heard and plumes of smoke rose from the area of the fighting, which had continued for at least 40 minutes.

Interior ministry forces had blocked a one kilometer section of road alongside the beach, but they did not appear to be intervening. Two militia pick-up trucks, with anti-aircraft guns on the back, were seen driving past towards the fighting.

An interior ministry official said the fighting was between militiamen from the city of Misrata, and units from Zintan. Both groups fought to oust Gaddafi and now are using their military power to underwrite a campaign for influence in the new Libya.

“There are two groups fighting,” said the official, Naji Awad, who was monitoring the battle from near the Marriott Hotel. “Misrata controls a police academy building up the road and they are fighting with Zintan. We do not know why they are fighting,” he said.

Libya’s ruling National Transitional Council (NTC) is struggling to impose its authority on the country and form a functioning national police force and army.

Western intervention into the Libyan uprising last year brought with it an influx of weapons, many of which are now in the hands of rogue militias unwilling to relinquish their new found power.
Heavily-armed militias have carved the country into local fiefdoms and their fighters, though they express loyalty to the NTC, answer only to their own commanders.

Several militias from outside the capital have set up bases in Tripoli. They clash with each other intermittently often because of disputes over who controls which neighborhoods of the city.
The violence on Wednesday was the first time in weeks that a major gun battle had broken out in the center of the capital.

(Reuters, Al-Akhbar)

Blame NATO for the Mess in Libya
River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Blame NATO for the Mess in Libya

Situation in Libya is promising a multi-layered conflict. (Onislam)

By Ramzy Baroud

The British Foreign Office and the US State Department are seriously concerned. Human rights officers in the United Nations are angry. Canada, for some reason, seems particularly enraged. The target of all this fury is Libya’s National Transitional Council (NTC), which is berated for failing to curtail widespread human rights violations throughout the country.

The story sounds somewhat typical. Rights watchdog groups sound the alarm regarding violations in some third world country. Western powers respond by demanding accountability. The media reports on the story until it eventually fades away.

However, this story requires more than a mere acknowledgement of the self-serving approach to human rights violations. The accusers include the UN and leading members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (Nato). It was the selective wording and interpretation of UN Security Council Resolution 1973 that led to a devastating war against Libya. The war destroyed one brutal regime and replaced it with another — at the expense of tens of thousands of Libyan lives.

As for the accused, it is no other than the NTC, which itself was a Nato political construct aimed at leading the political transition in Libya to serve western interests.

The whole Libyan affair was choreographed in a way that actually resembles the management of Iraq following the March 2003 invasion. Western powers purported to serve as the enforcers of international law, with the altruistic aim of ridding the world of vile dictators who ‘kill their own people’. But the situation in Libya is apparently less manageable than anticipated.

Iraq Misadventure

It turned out that ‘mission accomplished’ in Libya was yet another hoax. The result is no less devastating than what transpired in Iraq.

The current situation in Libya is promising a multi-layered conflict involving numerous militias, tribes and factions, all organised around ideological, familial and political objectives that are unique to Libya itself.

The war on Libya has empowered some parties and given them the chance to settle scores. This is highlighted in the current violence in Bani Walid, which saw widespread killings and tortures of those accused of being loyalists of Muammar Gaddafi.

All it takes for one militia to justify its onslaught against any town in Libya is to declare that it hosts Gaddafi loyalists. This was the case in Bani Walid, one of the last cities to surrender. The denunciation is enough to render every act of aggression and torture somehow acceptable by Arab and western media alike. The NTC is merely choosing sides to ensure that emerging powerful militias remain loyal to it, even if only verbally.

All of this goes against Nato’s initial calculations. Nato had hoped that a strong NTC, backed by well-controlled militias, would eventually merge to become the country’s next government and national army. This didn’t happen. The NTC was organised haphazardly without a real popular mandate, while the militias are still in their trenches to ensure that future Libya will not be dismissive of their tribes, cities and factional interests. It is a recipe for a civil war.

The situation worsened as rights groups issued stinging criticism of the dire situation in Libyan prisons. Amnesty International spoke of inmates dying under torture. In Davos, The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Navi Pillay, told Associated Press that various militias hold up to 8,000 prisoners in 60 detention centres around the country. In these centres, “there’s torture, extrajudicial executions, rape of both men and women”.

The Nato allies are concerned, of course. If the Libyan model — regime change from the air — completely fails, their military adventurism in the Middle East will suffer yet another setback. More, the unfolding of the Libyan travesty will continue to reawaken allegations of serious war crimes committed by Nato itself, who supposedly unleashed the war on Libya “to protect civilians and civilian populated areas under threat of attack”.

The Nato war on Libya was commanded by a Canadian, Lt Gen Charles Bouchard. Last June, Canadian Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird was quoted as saying that Libya should not be expected to go from “Gaddafi to Thomas Jefferson”. He failed to elaborate on what kind of democracy Nato intended to achieve with its 9,600-strikes mission.

To berate Libyans for failing to adhere to human rights is brazen hypocrisy, especially as many of Nato victims are still not fully counted for. The behaviour of militias, and the unrepresentative NTC are simply a continuation of the very violent legacy set forth by the very Nato countries that are demanding accountability, democracy and the rule of law.

– Ramzy Baroud is an internationally-syndicated columnist and the editor of His latest book is My Father Was a Freedom Fighter: Gaza’s Untold Story. (This article was originally published in Gulf News, February 1, 2012)

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Fear of Abuse in Libyan Prisons Haunts New Libya

Documents with photographs and details of people wanted by the Libyan External Security office are seen in the abandoned office where Muammar Gaddafi’s former spy chief and foreign minister Moussa Koussa was based in Tripoli 3 September 2011. (Photo: REUTERS – Anis Mili)
Published Tuesday, January 31, 2012
Allegations of torture made against Libya’s rebel forces have prompted a major humanitarian organization to halt its operations in the country. Libyan authorities, however, strongly reject accusations that such abuses are taking place.

Misrata – The issue of human rights in Libya after the fall of its dictatorial regime remains a controversial one. This is especially true in light of criticisms by international humanitarian organizations over what is happening in prisons run by the new Libyan authorities.
All eyes were on Misrata (east of Tripoli) during the revolution against former Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, thanks to its resilience against a lengthy blockade imposed by the former regime’s brigades.

The city is back in the spotlight after a report by the organization Medecins Sans Frontieres (MSF) was issued last Thursday, which announced that it was stopping its operations at detention centers in Misrata because of what it described as the exposure of detainees to torture.

However, the authorities in the city were surprised by these accusations, and the head of the national security agency in Misrata, Ibrahim Beit al-Mal, rejected MSF’s allegations in an interview with Al-Akhbar, saying that the information in the report was not true.

He described the report by the organization as “mendacious” and said it had come to serve an agenda hostile to the 17 February revolution.

In contrast to the MSF report, Beit al-Mal stressed that the prisoners were treated well and received excellent care and attention, in addition to the provision of food throughout the day.

As for the national security prison, which contains 680 inmates, he explained that he has dealt with human rights organizations with complete transparency and allowed them to inspect the prison and meet prisoners without any conditions or constraints.

In the same context, the official previously responsible for the security committee prison in Misrata, Ali Aswiti, denied that there had been any cases of beating or torture inside the prison.
He said that if any such cases were uncovered, the mistreatment would most likely have occurred before the detainees were handed over to the security committee and were probably due to the actions of an irresponsible individual. He was taken aback by the decision of the organization which “ran counter to the situation inside the prison.”

For his part, the deputy chair of the National Council for Civil Liberties and Human Rights, Abdul Basit Abu Mazairiq, asked the office of the public prosecutor to open an investigation into MSF’s “allegations” and “to hold accountable officials and pseudo-rebels who are trying to discredit the revolution.”

Abu Mazairiq, who was the official spokesman for the rebels in Misrata, spoke to Al-Akhbar on behalf of the human rights council, saying: “This council has its own character and independent financial standing, answerable directly to the legislative authorities while enjoying wide powers to monitor the performance of the government.”

He continued, saying: “Its members have the status of law enforcement officers, meaning that they can collect evidence at the scene of any crime carried out against human rights. The law requires that prosecutors provide the council with the results of any investigation referred to them by the council or any case that is related to human rights.”

Abu Mazairiq, who is a lawyer, a playwright, and intellectual, added that “among the additional functions of the council is to advise parliament on everything that relates to civil liberties and human rights and to review all laws and regulations and to recommend modifications, so that it complies with international treaties and covenants that govern human rights.”

As for MSF’s accusations, Abu Mazairiq commented that: “I cannot confirm or deny the truth of this, although I could not imagine that of any person, especially within the agencies of the transitional government. I think that if this kind of torture happened, it would have happened at the hands of one of the groups who are considered rebels and are hunting for individuals loyal to Gaddafi who participated directly in the fighting. Therefore, if these people are subjected to torture, it is usually before they have reached the security committee or the National Security Agency. During my repeated visits to places of detention, none of the detainees ever complained of mistreatment or torture.”

In terms of human rights after the revolution, the deputy chair of the national council said: “We in Libya are living through exceptional circumstances. The government has not extended its control entirely, and its agencies are still weak. There is a major role for the rebels in maintaining order. But that does not prevent the existence of a range of abuses which stem from the absence of a culture of human rights in Libya for 42 years under Gaddafi’s rule.”

However, he stressed that “the government must be tough on its members in the event that any of them violate human rights, which means what happened in Misrata is a matter that cannot be ignored. We must confirm the reasons which led MSF to stop working in Misrata and it is a matter that I will follow through on personally to find out the truth behind it.”

This article is an edited translation from the Arabic Edition.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

‘Is there really a pro-Qaddafi uprising in Libya?’


‘The Wild West in the Sahara’
“… Contrary to many of the headlines, the battle in Bani Walid, which the pro-revolutionary forces now seem to have decided in their favor, was not part of a pro-Gaddafi uprising. Green flags did not, as was first reported, sprout from the rooftops. The issue was the arrest of war crimes suspects. Since the end of last year’s fighting, Bani Walid has become a refuge for the waifs and strays of the former Gaddafi administration who are on the war crimes lists of other cities. A pro-government unit in the town had begun to arrest them when on Monday their base was attacked by a local clan. Four soldiers were killed, the rest fled, and the suspects were set free.
Now the National Guard wants them back. “We want to go home, we all want to go home,” says National Guard fighter Osman El Hadi, himself from Beni Walid. “But first we need to finish this.”
This minor uprising, in short, is less significant in itself than for what it says about the disarray of the post-revolutionary administration in Tripoli. Right now, power on the national level is exercised by the National Transitional Council (NTC). But this latest crisis has revealed once again that the NTC is, at best, a bit player.
The real power in Libya remains dispersed among the country’s bewildering array of grassroots military formations. Most are grouped around town or city military councils; Tripoli is divided into 11 district militias. The last time anyone counted, Misrata had 172, ranging from ten-man outfits to the 500-strong Halbus Brigade, with a wartime strength of 17,000. That figure has since plummeted, with thousands returning to their jobs….”

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Independent Libyan Fact-Finding Mission
by Stephen Lendman

My PhotoA joint report was released by the Arab Organization for Human Rights (AOHR), Palestinian Center for Human Rights (PCHR), and International Legal Assistance Consortium (ILAC).
Their mission investigated alleged widespread international law violations since mid-February 2011. Its mandate included investigating those committed by:

  • the former government;
  • NATO; and
  • insurgents.

It also sought to identify human rights issues, requiring Lybian and international attention.
Investigators included “leading international jurists and lawyers with expertise in international human rights law, international humanitarian law, international criminal law, transitional justice, and the development of legal systems in post-conflict environments.”

Information obtained from witnesses, victims, and other parties were kept confidential unless already revealed and available.

Investigations weren’t meant to be comprehensive. Rather, the mission tried “to convey the considered observations of its members, in order to facilitate, and prompt, the work of other bodies and authorities.”

Investigators included:

  1. Raji Sourani: PCHR Director, Arab Organization for Human Rights President (AOHR), International Federation for Human Rights Vice President, Executive Committee of the International Committee of Jurists member, as well as other credentials.
  2. Amin Mekki Medani: Sudanese lawyer and former AOHR President. He also held various UN posts.
  3. Mohsen Awad: former AOHR Secretary-General and Egyptian Human Rights Council member.
  4. Amina Bouayach: Moroccan Organization for Human Rights President and International Federation for Human Rights Vice President.
  5. Agneta Johansson: International Legal Assistance Consortium (ILAC) Deputy Director.
  6. William Meyer: ILAC Chairman and former CEELI Prague Institute Executive Director.
  7. Daragh Murray: Republic of Ireland IRCHSS Scholar and head of PCHR’s International Unit.
  8. Hany Abu Nahla: head of PCHR’s Translation Unit.

From November 15 – 22, investigations and interviews were conducted in Western Libya alone, in and around Tripoli, Zawiya, Sibrata, Khoms, Zliten, Misrata, Tawergha, and Sirte. Significantly, Benghazi was omitted, an area plagued by insurgent crimes.

Findings revealed “significant” international law violations. However, imposed constraints prevented investigators from reaching “definitive legal conclusions regarding individual incidents.” Nonetheless, they believe crimes of war and against humanity were committed.

Evidence suggests NATO classified civilian sites as military ones for attacks, including homes, schools, colleges, food distribution centers, hospitals, mosques, and others. In addition, civilians were targeted, notably in Sirte.

In fact, one incident there killed 47 or more non-combatants. This and other incidents raise “significant questions,” requiring further inquiry and disclosure.

Insurgents also violated international law, including civilian killings; torture and other abuses; wrongful detentions; mistreatment of foreign workers, and forced “displacement of suspected enemies of the Revolution.”

Observations about Gaddafi’s Governance

Unfortunately, investigators used dubious sources, calling his authority “one man rule.” They include the International Criminal Court (ICC) and International Crisis Group (ICG). Neither functions independently.

The ICC notoriously serves Western interests. As a result, it absolves or ignores their crimes while targeting their enemies like Gaddafi.

Former World Bank vice president Mark Malloch Brown and former US diplomat Morton Abramowitz co-founded the ICG. Now headed by former US diplomat Thomas Pickering and former International Criminal Tribunals chief prosecutor for Yugoslavia and Rwanda Louise Arbour, it functions the same way.

Its Executive Committee and advisors include former US and Western officials, former NATO commander Wesley Clark, and corporate figures like George Soros. They, in turn, reframed responsibility to protect authority in Libya to lawlessly intervene belligerently to establish neo-colonial rule. In fact, UN Charter provisions explicitly prohibit military force for humanitarian interventions.
Investigators also mischaracterized Jamahiriya governance, calling it “an elaborate facade” to hide Gaddafi’s sole authority. Quoting the ICG, they described it as “a highly complex formal ruling system containing a plethora of congresses and committees, often with overlapping powers, that have contributed to a sense of orchestrated and perpetual chaos.”

In addition by calling himself “Brother Leader,” Gaddafi “avoid(ed) accountability.”

They quoted the ICC saying “the Libyan State apparatus of power – including political, administrative, military and security branches – consists of a complex set of units and individuals, all of which are ultimately subject to the orders and control of” Gaddafi.

They ignored Washington’s longstanding regime change policy. As a result, an externally generated insurgency followed. In addition, the National Transitional Council (NTC) was illegitimately established with interim puppet authority for Western interests. Libyans are entirely shut out.
Nonetheless, investigators called it “internationally recognized as the Government of Libya….to oversee the transition to representative democracy.”

In fact, Washington, NATO partners, and complicit regional states don’t tolerate democracy or international law. Ignoring that denies reality.

Moreover, investigators claim “pre-revolutionary Libya (was) characterized by a climate of fear, in which individuals were afraid to speak their mind, where opposition – real or perceived – was ruthlessly crushed, and where security forces committed apparently widespread and systematic abuses with total impunity.”

Sadly, the facts belie this description. Most Libyans supported Gaddafi and still do. During NATO’s intervention, overwhelming numbers rallied openly. On July 1, 2011, 95% of Tripoli’s population (over a million strong) expressed support in Green Square.

Fear restrains them now. Doing so risks imprisonment, torture, and/or death by summary execution.
Libya’s social state was also ignored, including under Gaddafi’s 1999 Decision No. 111. It assured all Libyans free healthcare, education, electricity, water, training, rehabilitation, housing assistance, disability and old-age benefits, interest-free state loans, as well as generous subsidies to study abroad, buy a new car, help couples when they marry, practically free gasoline, and more.

Literacy under Gaddafi rose from 20 – 80%. Libya’s hospitals and private clinics were some of the region’s best. Now they’re in shambles.

Before war began, Libyans had Africa’s highest standard of living. Gaddafi’s Green Book said:
“The house is a basic need of both the individual and the family, therefore it should not be owned by others.” It also covered other social policies, saying:

  • “Women, like men, are human beings.
  • ….(A)ll individuals have a natural right to self-expression by any means….;
  • In a socialist society no person may own a private means of transportation for the purpose of renting to others, because this represents controlling the needs of others.
  • The democratic system is a cohesive structure whose foundation stones are firmly laid above the other (through People’s Conferences and Committees). There is absolutely no conception of democratic society other than this.
  • No representation of the people – representation is a falsehood. The existence of parliaments underlies the absence of the people, for democracy can only exist with the presence of the people and not in the presence of representatives of the people.”

Green Book ideology rejects Western-style democracy and predatory capitalism, especially neoliberal exploitation. It’s one of many reasons why Gaddafi was ousted.

His impressive social benefits also included free land, equipment, livestock and seeds for agriculture to foster self-sufficient food production. In addition, all basic food items were subsidized and sold through a network of “people’s shops.”

Moreover, since the 1960s, women could vote and participate politically. They could also own and sell property independently of their husbands. Under the December 1969 Constitutional Proclamation Clause 5, they had equal status with men, including for education and employment, even though men played leading roles in society.

Until Washington and rogue NATO partners blocked its approval, the UN Human Rights Council praised Gaddafi in its January 2011 “Report of the Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review: Libya Arab Jamahiriya.”

It said his government protected “not only political rights, but also economic, educational, social and cultural rights.” It also lauded his treatment of religious minorities, and “human rights training” of its security forces.

Throughout most of 2011, NATO’s killing machine destroyed 42 years of achievements. All Libyans benefitted. Why else did Gaddafi have overwhelming support?

His vision marked him for removal. It was just a matter of when, even though he cooperated with Western powers post-9/11 on matters of intelligence and terrorism.

Until vilified and targeted, he was welcomed in Western capitals. In 2003, he came in from the cold, became a valued Western ally, and had meetings and discussions with top officials like UK Prime Ministers Tony Blair and Gordon Brown, France’s Nicolas Sarkozy, Italy’s Silvio Berlusconi, US Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice, and others.

He also participated in the 2009 G-8 Summit in L’Aquila, Italy as Chairman of the African Union. At the time, he met and shook hands with Obama.

Moreover, ABC News interviewed him live, and on January 21, 2009, The New York Times published his op-ed headlined, “The One-State Solution” to resolve the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. He called “living under one roof….the only option for a lasting peace.”

On May 16, 2006, Washington restored full diplomatic relations. Libya was removed from its state sponsors of terrorism list. At the time, Rice called the move:
“tangible results that flow from the historic decisions taken by Libya’s leadership in 2003 to renounce terrorism and to abandon its weapons of mass destruction programs….Libya is an important model as nations around the world press for changes in behavior by the Iranian and North Korean regimes.”

She also praised Gaddafi’s “excellent cooperation” in fighting terrorism. Moreover, he opened Libya’s markets to Western interests by arranging deals with Big Oil giants BP, ExxonMobil, Royal Dutch Shell, Occidental, France’s Total, Italy’s Eni Gas and others. By all appearances, he joined the club, so why turn on him?

Though on board in some ways, he very much wasn’t on others. He supported Palestinian rights. As a result, he opposed Israel’s occupation and Gaza’s siege.

Earlier he backed South Africa’s anti-apartheid struggles, as well as others in Northern Ireland, Spain, and elsewhere.

He had to die, but Why??

He opted out of AFRICOM’s imperial regional plan. He wanted Libyans to control their own resources and use revenues domestically for all Libyans. His Central Bank of Libya was state owned. It created its own money interest-free for economic growth, not speculation and wealth for predatory bankers.

He promoted pan-African unity, an idea anathema to Washington and Western powers. He advocated a new “Gold Standard,” replacing dollars with gold dinars, and hoped other African and Muslim states would adopt the idea. That alone got him targeted for removal.

He had nothing to do with downing Pan Am 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland in 1988. Neither did Abdel Basset Ali al-Megrahi. Scottish judges knew he was innocent but were pressured to convict.
Gaddafi never admitted fault. He took responsibility solely to have international sanctions removed. To this day, he and al-Megrahi stand falsely accused. Likely CIA /MI6/and/or Mossad involvement is never mentioned.

A Final Comment

Libyan Investigators have legitimate credentials as human rights supporters. Organizations like PCHR do extraordinary work. They deserve praise, encouragement and help.
Their report highlighted international crimes, need for more investigation, and prosecutions for those responsible.

It expressed concern for ongoing abuses in detention, mistreatment of foreign workers, and forced displacements of suspected Gaddafi loyalists. It called for measures to stop ongoing crimes.
Nonetheless, it wrongfully said “Libya is emerging from 42 years of authoritarian rule and governance characterized by injustice, the denial of fundamental human rights, and impunity.”

Libya’s now repressively occupied. A climate of fear prevails. Insurgent killers threaten Gaddafi supporters. Silence best protects them. Nonetheless, Libyans revealed crimes committed by NATO and rebel rat forces.

However, others condemning Gaddafi appear suspect. Indeed, he had enemies, but most Libyans supported him with good reason. As a result, the report tragically falls short. It includes NATO and insurgent crimes but mischaracterizes Gaddafi’s rule.

Hopefully, another mission will follow in less volatile times. Violence still rages. Little gets reported. Western media scoundrels entirely suppress it. Libyans deserve better. Their nation was peaceful until NATO showed up. Now it’s destroyed and all previously enjoyed rights lost.
Mission team members must acknowledge it and point fingers where they belong.


In mid-January, 12,000 US troops were positioned in Malta ahead of occupying Libya. On January 18, Libya SOS said hundreds of American soldiers already arrived. Libya’s Western-appointed foreign minister said 6,000 came to Tripoli’s Mitiga International Airport.
Straightaway, they set up “mobile camps and equipment around oil fields and refineries.” In other words, they’re protecting Western interests, principally oil. Libyans lost their rightful resources and living standard they afforded.

“Tunis Focus” reports that US forces are in Brega, Ras Lanouf, Sirte, and Tripoli’s Mitiga International Airport. Moreover, US and NATO helicopters, warplanes, and drones now patrol Libyan airspace. They’re surveilling and attacking suspicious targets.
Ahead lies occupation, neo-colonization, pillaging, exploitation, violence and repression. It persists wherever America shows up. So does overwhelming suffering and human misery. Libyans experienced it for months. Much more lies ahead.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

West’s bad dreams in Libya has started shaping-up….– Qaddafi loyalists return

West’s bad dreams in Libya has started shaping-up. Last week, western-client rebel government of National Transitional Council (NTC) No.2 man, Abdel Hafiz Ghoga, was forced to resign as result of protests by members of various armed gangs working for NATO in the past. Abdel Hafiz Ghoga was accused of being a CIA agent.
Yesterday, Associated Press reported that Moammar Qaddafi loyalists retook control of western city of Bani Walid and raised ousted regime’s green flag on Monday.
Hundreds of well-armed Qadhafi’s supporters fought for eight hours in Bani Walid with the western-recruited armed thugs, known as the May 28 Brigade, which was eventually driven out,” said Mubarak al-Fatmani, the head of Bani Walid local council.
West’s ‘humanitarian war’ against Qaddafi regime last year – devastated Africa’s top socialist country. The NTC – an unstable coalition of ex-Qaddafi regime officials, Qatar’s funded Salaafis, including some with links to CIA, Mossad and MI6, and other western intelligence assets – itself estimate that the war took 50,000 lives and injured another 50,000 people. Rising infighting between the NTC’s factions is opening the door to full-scale civil war between rival clan-based and regional militias.
In November 2011 – Lius Moreno-Ocampo, the chief prosecutor for International Criminal Court, a Zionist judicial setup, said that ICC will investigate NATO’s war crimes during bombing of Libya. If it ever happened, it would be used to whitewash western crimes, as we saw in case of the Goldstone Report on Israeli war crimes in Gaza.
The Geneva-based pro-Israel Jewish pressure group UN Watch was the first NGO to throw its propaganda lies against Qaddafi. In February 2011, UN Watch blackmailed 70 so-called “human right groups” to send a letter to Israel-Firsters Barack Obama, EU’s Catherine Ashton and UN’s Ban Ki-Moon demanding military action against Libya by invoking the “Responsibility to Protect” doctrine. Now, the UN Watch is repeating the same demand against Syria. Zionist Jew Carl Gershman, president of Congress-funded Israel lobby group ‘National Endowment for Democracy’, was one of signatories of the UN Watch letter.
“Now the real resistance will begin! The Libyan people are now even surer than they were during this summer that the NTC sold our country to the NATO colonial countries. As NATO continues to hunt down Saif al Islam, many around our country are making Saif the new leader of the resistance to colonialism in Libya and in Africa. I personally pledge my support for him and pray that Allah will protect him. Watch what the Gadhafi tribe and my Waffala tribe do together in the coming weeks—but also starting today. Maybe NATO can be said in some ways to have won round one. But let’s see what happens in the many rounds to come,” Dr. Franklin Lamb quoted a student of Tripoli University in October 2011.
It seems it’s the begining of America’s ultimate defeat in Libya as we see currently in Iraq and Afghanistan.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

"Go away, go away!"


‘In the absence of these Two, he and his ilk are “roughed up, jostled” & have to be “pulled to safety!”‘
“…When Abdul Jalil, NTC chairman, came out in an attempt to address the crowd, some protesters hurled empty plastic bottles at him, prompting security forces to fire tear gas.
“Go away, Go away,” the protesters chanted as Abdul Jalil spoke. He then went back into the building but he is believed to have been pulled to safety from a back door when the crowd charged into the building.
Protesters threw stones and metal bars at the building, breaking its windows, before storming the headquarters. One protester left the building carrying a set of loudspeakers and screaming: “Spoils of war!” Angry protesters also damaged a Toyota Land Cruiser used by Abdul Jalil….
“People are not happy with the council because it has also given government posts to people who are known to have links with Gaddafi.”(Abdel Jalil himself is a Qaddafi henchman, until he was adopted by Bernard Henry Levy!)…
The NTC is grappling with problems, including the disbanding of dozens of powerful militias that effectively control the country. Thursday, Abdul Hafiz Ghoga, vice president of the NTC, was roughed up by university students in Benghazi. He was surrounded by a crowd and jostled before he was pulled away to safety..”

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Abdel Jalil says civil war possible if NTC quits

 Grand Arab revoution
Lawrence of Arabia
Prince Faisal and Lawrence of Arabia -1918


92 years later

Levy of north Africa

Prince Abdel Jalil and Levy of north Africa – 2010

Mustafa Abdul Jalil - Cameron & Sarkozy Visit Libya

Mustafa Abdul Jalil - Cameron & Sarkozy Visit Libya
Protesters storming the NTC’s Benghazi headquarters

Libya leader says civil war possible if NTC quits

Ibrahim al-Majbari, AFP

Last updated: January 23, 2012

Libyan leader Mustafa Abdel Jalil said Sunday the nation would fall into a “civil war” if the ruling National Transitional Council resigned, as it faced its first major challenge.

Angry protests in the eastern city of Benghazi — the city which first rebelled against Kadhafi last year — have dealt a severe blow to the NTC’s functioning. It led its deputy head Abdel Hafiz Ghoga to resign on Sunday, three days after furious students had manhandled him.

“We are not going to resign because it would lead to civil war,” NTC head Abdel Jalil said in an interview on the Libya al-Hurra television station late Sunday as protests raged in Benghazi.
Abdel Jalil said some “hidden hands” were “pushing the demonstrators.”

“Who is pushing these sit-ins prompting protesters to invade the headquarters of the council with such savagery?,” the new Libya’s leader said, referring to the attack on NTC offices in Benghazi Saturday.
Crowds of protesters threw several home-made grenades at and stormed the NTC offices with iron rods and stones before setting the building’s front ablaze, witnesses and council members said.
River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Will 2012 Bring Tribal War to Libya?

“To date nothing has been achieved by the new government and people are growing very angry.”



The weather in Tripoli this New Year’s weekend is unseasonably bone chilling with heavy rains flooding the streets reminding this observer more of dreary London this time of year than the southern Maghreb coast of the Mediterranean. My modest family run neighborhood hotel off Omar Muktar Street is clean and cheap, but my room has no heat except what eventually builds up under a stack of velour Turkish blankets.


Much valued by me and the only other registered guest, a Libyan engineer from Sirte whose home was torched by rebels in early October, is the hotel proprietor who reopened in early November following closure since last March. He is an encyclopedia of knowledge and opinion on “the current situation” here. But the hotel owner and his two English speaking sons are not the only ones who are increasingly speaking out about realities in the “new Libya” nearly two months after NATO declared another victory and stopped systematically and seemingly indiscriminately reducing to rubble this essentially defenseless and militarily speaking, Third World country, with the First Worlds most advanced arsenal.

My good luck this trip was to find my best friend from the months I was in Libya last summer. “Ahmad,” who like most contacts disappeared without a trace on August 22nd following the fall of Tripoli to NATO forces. As so many of us have learned, those we knew this summer either fled fast, were jailed, or were killed. “Ahmad”resurfaced in September via email to explain that he was in hiding. He went deep down in South Libya in a small Sahara town the name of which he told me has never even made it on a map, much less google earth. Then, a few weeks later Ahmad disappeared again when he ventured out to see his family near Tripoli. He was betrayed by friends for militia cash, was arrested, tortured and jailed without charges simply because his family was known to be Gadhafi supporters. The last week of Ahmad’s incarceration, which ended only because one of the guards recognized him as a former classmate, he and the other more than 100, including Sheik Khaled Fantouch, all held in a large room in a makeshift Misrata militia prison, were given nothing at all to eat and shared bottles of water to stay alive.
Life has become more complicated in Libya for about everyone it seems including foreign visitors. One example: Back in the summer, before August 21st, if one found himself on a side street somewhere face to face with some heavily armed and scowling types it was a good idea to whisper, “Allah, Muammar, Libya, al bas (‘that all we need!”)and chances were quite good that you would be warmly received.

Now it’s much more complicated. More than 55 rebel militia, totaling more than 30,000 armed fighters control parts of Tripoli, some of them loosely under the protection and direction of the TNC, Tripoli Military Commander Belhaj. Belhaj, formerly with Al Qaeda spent seven years in prison here when the US & UK sent him to the Gadhafi regimes as part of its rendition program.

His party, now being formed into the Muslim Brotherhood will likely win next June’s election. His in the third largest militia in Tripoli. The largest is run by Salh Gait, from Tripoli, and according to his deputy has 5000 fighters and adding more.

These days in Libya it is a good idea to memorize the name of the largest of the local militia and the name of its leader so when approached by the heavily armed unfriendly types one can rub two index fingers together and say the leader’s name while adding “mlieh, mlieh”i.e. “good, good.” One wants to avoid saying the wrong militia and leader name because there is today an uneasy calm among militias in Tripoli after a few weeks of largely unreported skirmishes.
Largely unreported for the following reason. The transitional government daily touts the new freedom of the press here and they claim that there are 43 new newspapers or magazines. That on the surface sounds pretty good and there are more or fewer each week as local and foreign funders fail to deliver on funding promises or others start publishing a newspaper or magazine.
What is remarkable about the “new free Libya, new free media” is that it is 100 percent pro “new government”. I am advised that it’s only partly out of fear of consequences for failing to toe the line that accounts for this apparent universal support for the TNC. Another reason according to a western ambassador who have returned to his post here is that the new media sprang from the myriad militia and they simply have a psychological issue with criticizing any of the obvious problems which seem to be swelling by the day. Ahmad agrees. “They were so involved with NATO and its rebels that they do not want to admit that they were wrong in many ways so they ignore what is really happening in front of their eyes”.
This observer witnessed one example yesterday at “Green Square”. “Almost everyone still calls it Green Square rather than its TNC re-name of Martyrs Square” the hotel proprietor explained,“because it’s been Green Square for decades and what’s wrong with that name?

If you tell someone to meet you at ‘Martyrs Square’ its sounds silly to most of us. What if the new Egyptian government renames Tahrir Square? Will people in Egypt accept it?”

What surprised me yesterday is that there were two well attended anti-government demonstrations being held at opposite ends of this large space. One was led by two women I knew during the summer who were and openly say they remain, Gadhafi regime supporters. One ran a women’s lawyers’ group last summer and the other a women’s group. The one demonstration was demanding that the husbands and children of Libyan wives and mothers be granted Libyan citizenship. The same struggle that continues decade after decade in Lebanon.

Photos of 12/29/11 women’s demonstration at Green Square
(Martyr’s Sq) in Tripoli in favor of the right of Libyan women
to give their husbands and children Libyan citizenship
(photos: fplamb)

Born in Libya, Only know Libya, Loyal to Libya, belong to Libya
(photos: fplamb)
The other demonstration, led by the lady lawyer who I last saw giving a speech at a conference at the Corinthia Hotel a few days before Tripoli fell, was organized by a group demanding accountability for those who have disappeared and are being held in scores of secret militia prisons around the country. According to her committee’s research, in addition to the 7000 plus pro Gadhafi loyalists acknowledged as imprisoned by the TTC,, 80% identified by name, the Committee for Justice for the Disappeared, claim that there are more than 35,000 Libyans being held secretly by militia that are outside the control and sometimes even the knowledge of the essentially powerless TNC. Ahmad agrees with this figure from what he learned in prison and explained that he would take me to a school near my hotel before classes open on January 7th and if we walk by at night without traffic noise we can hear the shouting of guards and screams of prisoners being held.
It does appear that at least for now, demonstrations are being allowed although they were plenty of observers watching and which ones are from the TNC and militia security forces is anyone’s guess.
Ahmad just arrived to pick me up and informed me that neither demonstration was reported in this morning’s papers thanks to the new Libyan feel good media who don’t criticize the new government.
The lady who heads the woman’s group has several issues her group plans to raise. One is the fact than Libyan women have been disappearing from public places and not heard from again. One of her suspicions is that some are ending up in the homes of former Gadhafi relatives and supporters of the regime. She estimates that just in Tripoli more than 90 such homes, all of them in desired areas, often on the sea, were ransacked by various rebels gangs, stripped of possessions, some appearing now in various street souks for sale. Following the trashing of some of the properties, many militia members got a better idea. Why return to say, Benghazi, Misrata, or wherever they came from when they can just live here in Tripoli and in relative luxury? Militiamen are now doing this by the hundreds, “Mara” the women advocate claims. “They are well-armed, living off a little militia pay, but mainly from various crimes, these groups are repairing some of the damage they caused and have moved in long term even charging rent to some new arrivals. Mara added,“If they see an empty house, especially if it’s a really nice one, they assume, often correctly, that it belonged to a Gadhafi relative, official or supporter and they think it’s theirs for the grabbing. And they are grabbing. They dare anyone or even another militia or the non-existent new government to try to remove them. They have no intention of returning to where they came from and less on given up their arms. Actually they are stockpiling more weapons and explosives both as security and to increase their political bargaining power. It appears that Libya is up for grabs for so many, local and foreign operations.”

The same lady said the population of Tripoli has risen by one million and the locals want the “outsiders” to return to their towns and leave Tripoli’s real residents to take care of their city. The outsiders are said to add to traffic problems and a decline in security so people stay inside at night.

Some of the home invaders have moved in their families from other parts of Libya and some are accused of holding kidnapped female foreign domestic workers and are suspected by the women advocacy groups, kidnapping women off the streets and enslaving them within their sanctuaries.
What outrages many here is that the new “government” will not even acknowledge that these problems exist. Just as the new government has no desire for the International Criminal Court to investigate any crimes from either side because they don’t want investigators snooping around asking questions.
Libyans inside the country and those seeking safety in nearby countries, are increasingly turning to the ten largest Libyan tribes to put an end to this situation and many other problems.
Bodies dupmed in sewage

One situation that is said to be ready to explode in violence is from areas like Bani Wallid and Serte where NATO and its local forces killed many civilians that no human right group even knows about. One local militia commander explained to me and my two colleagues some of what he learned while helping run a secret prison: “Whatever intra-tribal or geographical divisions existed a year ago, they are 500 times worse today. The Tribes are arming and have given the new government several deadlines for committing to rebuild destroyed homes and businesses, helping homeless families, and getting the guns off the streets and sending the armed gangs back to where they came from. To date nothing has been achieved by the new government and people are growing very angry.”

Other current problems causing strife here are the rising prices on everything except electricity which no one has paid in the whole country according to my sources since last February. But the electricity cuts are similar to during the NATO bombing. Lack of money is a problem with citizens not being allowed to withdraw more than 750 dinars each month. Money is still relatively scarce and if one accepts that 7 billion was taken out of Libyan banks by former Libyan officials and businessmen early last spring, more than 8 billion was withdrawn by citizens in a panic last summer before a limit of 500 dinars per month was imposed by the Gadhafi government.
This observer has been advised both in neighboring countries and inside Libya by Tribal officials that war in coming maybe as soon as March 1. “Our history, our culture, our dignity, is at stake. It is the responsibility of the Tribes to cleanse the country of these outlaws just as we did against the Italian colonizers.”
During a meeting in a nearby country one Gadhafi loyalist explained:

“We know which tribes worked with NATO and sold out their birthrights. Some did the same thing with the Italians and over the years with foreign oil companies.  

We will fight to restore a path for the Libyan people knowing that mistakes were made by the Gadhafi regime but also that his support today ranges from 90% in Wafala Tribe areas like Bani Walid to close to 60% in Tripoli.  

He is not coming back but many of his good policies will return ehshallah.”

fplamb@gmail.comHe is the author of The Price We Pay: A Quarter-Century of Israel’s Use of American Weapons Against Civilians in Lebanon.
He contribute to Uprooted Palestinians Blog

Please Sign

Shatila Palestinian Refugee Camp
Beirut Mobile: +961-70-497-804
Office: +961-01-352-127

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Franklin Lamb is doing research in Libya. He is reachable c\o

Washington’s Greater Middle East Agenda: War

Comment Updated

I agree with Stephen, “Washington plans waring against the region one country at a time to replace independent regimes with client ones.”, but I think there is no gaurantee that the one war at a time (Libya) would work.
Yes, the road to Tehran pass through Damascus, but the road to Damascus pass through Tehran. So, it wan’t be a war at a time. All parties standing with syria (including Russia and China) are not doing favors, they are defending themselves, their interests, against American global aggression.
The Russian and Iraqi initiatives are designed to save Obama’s face after the failure of Erdugan’s mission of changing the regime in Syria,
Moreover, America, after its failure to handle Iraq to its puppet Allawi, and its shamful withdrawal from Iraq, the second “revolution” in Egypt found itself forced to deal with Malki and use him to find a way to save Obama’s face, and maintain a minimum presence in Iraq.
In his visit to Washington, the fox, Al-Maliki dedicated three things:
 First, he confirmed his “independence” from America, which appeared in the press conference held with Obama especially when they talked about the Syrian file.

Second, he grabbed authorization to implement the Arab initiative on Syria over draft amicable solution managed by Iraq, not hostile manner adopted by Qatar.

The third and most importantly, Malki accepted the request of USA President to be the communication channel connecting Washington Tehran.

Therefore, Al-Maliki had left Iraq a leader of troubled and vulnerable state, and  returned a regional leader requested by the largest empire in the world to assist them in the most important and sensitive files in the region, namely Iran and the Syrian file, and guarantee the USA’s interests in Iraq.

On his way back, Al-Maliki, has deliberately announced the green light obtained from Obama for his initiative, coordinated with Tehran and Moscow, he, even announced sending Faleh Al-Fayyad, his national security adviser Damascus, thus undermining Arab league’s plans to transfer the Syrian file to the Security Council.

Arab regimes shall resist and try use their puppets, Allawi, Hashimi and others to spoil Malki’s agenda.
 The American global war on Syria is over, the”humanitarian intervention” is not on the table,  but they will try to keep Syria under pressure.
Most likely, as Dr. Amin Huttate expected, a new world with two or more poles would emerge from the Syrian womb.
However, Syria shall need time to finish its surgical militaty operations against Nato “rebels”.  
Washington’s Greater Middle East Agenda: War

 by Stephen Lendman
My PhotoTargeting the Middle East’s rich oil and gas resources, Washington plans waring against the region one country at a time to replace independent regimes with client ones.
At issue is achieving total dominance over MENA (Middle East/North Africa) countries and Central Asia to Russia and China’s borders. Another key objective is removing or marginalizing their regional influence.

Russia is Washington’s main military rival. Between them, they control about 97% of the world’s nuclear arsenal with sophisticated delivery systems able to target strategic global sites.

China also has significant military strength. According to a 2009 Pentagon report, its naval forces alone are formidable.They number at least 260 vessels, including 75 or more major warships and over 60 submarines.

In addition, Beijing has hundreds of nuclear warheads, sophisticated delivery systems, and other strategic weapons. As a result, it’s the region’s dominant military power.

During Asia’s mid-November Bali summit, Obama sought anti-China coalition partners to enhance Washington’s regional position. Key is establishing military superiority.

Obama said America “is a Pacific power, and we are here to stay.” Military spending amounts “will not – I repeat, will not – come at the expense of the Asia Pacific.”

It does include escalating military tensions with China. Beijing is very mindful of US belligerence and quest for global dominance.

During his visit, Obama announced boosting America’s Australian presence as part of a broader military buildup targeting China and Eastern Russia.

Together with South Korea, America’s expanding its Asian footprint on Jeju Island with a strategic naval base for Aegis class attack ships. They’re equipped with sophisticated SM-3 interceptor missiles for offense, as well as powerful computers and tracking radar for first-strike capability.

In 2002, Seoul announced construction plans to accommodate Pentagon officials despite strong local opposition. Located south of Korea proper, Jeju is its only special autonomous province. It’s situated in the Korea Strait, Southwest of Jeollanam-do Province it separated from in 1946.

Japan lies Northeast, China due West. Jeju is in central Northeast Asia. Strategically located Southwest of Japan, East of China between the East China Sea and Korea Strait shipping lanes, Pentagon officials value its location to control key shipping lanes and regional waters.

China, of course, is concerned about America’s growing military presence that challenges its regional dominance.

Beijing also rivals Washington economically. The IMF’s 2011 World Economic Outlook shows it surpassing America by 2016, based on purchasing power parity (PPP).

It reflects an appropriate exchange rate between currencies as measured by the cost of a representative basket of goods in one country v. another.

China’s growth requires increasing amounts of resources, especially oil, gas, others for its industries, and enough food for its huge population.

Getting them puts them in direct competition with America that wants unchallenged global control. AFRICOM was established to secure it and deny Beijing and Russia access.

America tolerates no rivals. Economic, political and belligerent policies are employed to marginalize and eliminate them. In contrast, China and Russia establish relationships through mutually beneficial investments and other economic ties. Longer-term, they matter most.

Targeting Syria and Iran
Last winter, Syria’s externally generated uprising began. Orchestrating change like elsewhere in the region, Washington replicated its Libya model. Heavily armed insurgents are involved. So are Turkey, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Lebanon’s March 14 alliance, other Arab League partners, and Israel.

Regime change is planned. So far it’s short of war, but it’s coming if other measures fail. Middle East analyst Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya calls the Syrian situation “complicated,” because of “several competing trends of opposition.”

Internal and external forces are involved. In Libya, NATO formed the Transitional National Council (TNC) to replace Gaddafi and Jamahiriya government. Proxy Syrian National Council (SNC) members were enlisted to replace Bashar al-Assad’s regime after it’s ousted.
Internal conflict’s raged for months to “isolate, cripple, and subjugate Damascus.” Given Syria’s military capability, expect protracted conflict and violence to continue.
However, disturbing reports about hundreds of US and NATO Special Forces massing on Syria’s border may tip the balance of power if using them for combat operations is planned, especially if combined with air operations.
According to former FBI whisleblower Sibel Edmonds, Washington and other NATO partners have a “secret training camp” at America’s Incirlik, Turkey air base. In April, it began “organiz(ing) and expand(ing)” Syrian dissidents.

Edmonds says Washington and NATO forces are also training Turkish troops for a possible Syria strike. In addition, US forces from Iraq’s Ain al-Assad base were transferred to Jordan on December 8 instead of returning home.

Obama’s cynical Fort Bragg speech about withdrawing US forces from Iraq, in fact, concealed their regional repositioning and continued Iraq presence on major bases America will keep operating.

In fact, it plans increased numbers of regional forces through one or more Libyan bases, larger force contingents in Kuwait, expanded ties with Saudi Arabia,
Bahrain, Qatar, the UAE and Oman, and a greater overall regional footprint to establish an enhanced “security architecture” to integrate air, ground, and naval units for future combat missions.

Israel’s Mossad-connected DEBKAFile also said “American special forces troops have been diverted to positions in Jordan opposite a Syrian tank concentration building up across the kingdom’s northern border.”

In addition, America’s naval presence includes additional warships and attack boats, perhaps there for combat, not saber rattling.

Edmonds said NATO forces have conducted training operations near Syria’s border since May. Until now, Western media scoundrels suppressed it. Still, little about it is reported. The situation bears watching, including hostile anti-Iranian rhetoric.

Washington claims Tehran threatens world peace, saying its commercial nuclear program plans nuclear weapons development, despite no evidence proving it.
In October, Washington falsely charged Iran with plotting to kill Saudi Arabia’s US ambassador. The accusation sounded more like a bad film plot than real intent. Laughable on its face, it was baseless propaganda.
In November, outdated, forged, long ago discredited, and perhaps nonexistent documents were used to claim Iran’s developing nuclear weapons. Again, no credible evidence proves it. Instead, baseless accusations were used to justify Washington’s claim about Iran threatening world peace.
America and Israel alone hold that distinction along with Arab League client states supporting their rogue agendas.
On December 15, Manhattan Federal Judge George Daniels said he’ll sign an order accusing Iran, Hezbollah, and Al Qaeda of responsibility for the 9/11 attacks.
In response to a lawsuit brought by family members of 9/11 victims, he claimed Iran provided material support to Al Qaeda, based on spurious testimonies from three Iranian defectors whose affidavits remained sealed during court proceedings.
Expert witnesses never appeared in court to refute them. Instead Judge Daniels relied solely on anti-Iranian operatives, making baseless accusations without evidence.
Testimonies given were false. Iran, Hezbollah and Al Qaeda had nothing to do with a plot hatched in Washington to initiate America’s global war on terror. Ravaging the world one country at a time was planned.
It remains ongoing across the Middle East and Central Asia. Syria and now Iran are targeted. At issue is regime change throughout the region to install subservient client states.
The road to Tehran runs through Damascus. Expect belligerence to persist longer-term. The business of America is war. Waging them alone matters. New targets replace subdued ones. Nations are pillaged for wealth, power and dominance. War profiteers want them fought, win, lose or draw.
Iran is hugely important. It has about 10% of proved world oil reserves. It’s second only to Russia in gas resources with about 33 trillion cubic meters. In fact, after a potentially huge new Caspian Sea discovery, it may rank first.
Washington covets Iran’s mineral wealth to control its supply, price, what nations get access in what amounts, and which ones don’t. Regionally, Iran’s the remaining crown jewel.

Washington’s longstanding policy is replacing its government with a subservient client regime.

On December 16, Obama told the 71st General Assembly of the Union for Reform Judaism that America will continue pressuring Iran with “no options off the table.”
One of them is war. Battleground belligerence could rage across the entire Mediterranean Basin through Central Asia to Russia and China’s borders.
As a result, general war may follow. America’s key rivals may enter. Their interests very much are at stake. Nuclear weapons could be used.
Preventing potentially global catastrophic destruction is crucial before it’s too late to matter.
Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at
Also visit his blog site at and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

This is "the best we have!"


“… This may bolster the SNC’s standing with Mr Assad’s enemies abroad, especially those in the United States who see in Syria’s conflict a chance to isolate Iran and tilt the regional balance of power against it. But Mr Ghalioun’s comments did not go down well with some colleagues, who think he jumped the diplomatic gun. Nor did some rude remarks he made about the Kurds, an important minority in Syria. Ghalioun has yet to win the avuncular mediating status of his Libyan counterpart, Mustafa Abdul Jalil, now the interim president…Barely two months old, the SNC is still fragile. Many of its members, both in exile and within Syria, grumble that policies are often conjured up on the spur of the moment and are sometimes naive. Views differ within the SNC on whether to seek foreign intervention. And some SNC members think Islamists are over-represented. The enthusiasm of Turkey’s Islamist government for the SNC may account for the Islamists’ disproportionate presence in it.
The Free Syrian Army is also causing problems for the SNC. It is probably smaller and less united than its leader, Colonel Riad Asaad, says … But the SNC is trying to keep the uprising peaceful and wants to bring the Free Syrian Army under tighter political control. Representatives of the council and the army recently met in Turkey and agreed to co-ordinate, with the soldiers promising to scale back their attacks. But a few days later defectors killed seven pro-government soldiers at a checkpoint in the north-western province of Idleb.
The defectors think the SNC too timid. Borderlands close to Turkey, Jordan and Lebanon are becoming more violent; some opposition people want outsiders to create buffer zones and humanitarian corridors…
Wary Western diplomats describe the SNC, whether or not it can contain the Free Syrian Army, as “the best we have”, though it is far from achieving the recognition given to the National Transitional Council in Libya…”

Libya wanted good relations with Israel?

Israel to open embassy in Libya: report
Paper says “first Israeli ambassador” will visit Libya in the very near future, heading a mission, a
ccompanied by some Arab Israeli doctors as a “medical initiative” toward the Libyan people.       
Libya wanted good relations with Israel?      
Israel rejected on Saturday, the Jewish News Agency in Europe claim, that Tel Aviv trying with Libyan Transitional Council, to open of an Israeli Embassy in Tripoli amid confirmation of «global organization of the Jews of Libya», that news may be true
However, Jewish News, Raslan Abu Rakoun, the candidate for the post of first Israeli Ambassador in Libya, said that the reports are based on a report published in Web newsletter, «walla», the published information on building diplomatic ties in Libya, and my appointment as Ambassador to Israel, there is wrong information, although I hope the opening of Israeli embassies in Arab countries.
In turn, the Israeli Foreign Ministry sources expressed its surprise from «news naked from truth», «the Ministry had no information on any news regarding contacts with Libyan official». The Ministry spokesman, Yigal let Moore, said that «there is no basis for everything published in the media» about relations with Libya.
In contrary, the Israeli site reported assurances about the sources in the «global organization of the Jews of Libya», based in OR Yehuda in central Israel, that the «story» could be true,   in recent weeks, one on behalf of the organization in the United States, David Gharbi contacts with  NTC, to strengthen relations with the transitional Government in Libya.
Meir Kahloun the Head of the oraginzation said in an interview with the site, «Libyan Jews believe if the new Government  is not fanatical as the former Government that the Libyan people can be civilized and democratic and free, he claimed that «the Jewish property  in Libya is estimated at 75 billion dollars, which the Libyan authorities must return».
The Jews of Libya expressed support for the rebels, from their side the «rebel representatives» also expressed a desire to improve relations with Israel , adding that «one of the speakers of the opposition, Ahmed Shabbani requested Israeli help against lateLibyan leader Moammar Al-Kadhafi from  our part, we sent a letter to the President of the Transitional Council, Mustafa Abdeljalil, offered assistance in establishing the new system.
Furthermore, the French philosopher Bernard Henri levy, in an interview with the newspaper «Israel today», sais that on the eve of the final battle to overthrow the Libyan capital Tripoli his cell phone was used to tranfer accurate coordinates bombardment and to receive a list of targets for attack,  Levy told how he erred in the rapprochement between Israel and Libya. At the end of last may, he received a phone call from a contact in Libya, asked me to convey a message to his friends, that “Libya would not be hostile to them”.
The following day, levy went to Israel, met with the head of Government, Benjamin Netanyahu, and forged together a statement issued following a meeting with French Foreign Minister, Alain Juppe, saying he hopes Israel when “a new Libyan Government is formed it would push forward the peace and security in the region”.
Levy revealed that he had asked his friends in the Transitional Council to make sure that the new Government does not include any Islamists and  at the end «this eventually happened.

Meanwhile, Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, Luis Moreno Ocampo said: «I think that the way in which the Mr. (moamer) kadhafi was murdered in October last year after his captue by the rebels raise doubts about being a war crime.

He added: “I think this issue is a very important. We will raise these concerns to the international authorities, to develop a comprehensive strategic plan to investigate all these crimes».
(News, AP)

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

%d bloggers like this: