Update:
Here is a piece from the Veterans Today website that contradicts the piece I posted below. VT is an anti-Zionist website run by a former veteran that is obviously left-wing. It’s affiliated with the military, but within those limitations, has published a lot of interesting contrarian articles about US foreign policy. The level of quality and sourcing varies widely. Their analysis of Libya is completely different from that of most antiwar sites, and I’m linking it here to balance the post below. I honestly don’t know enough to judge for myself, so I’ll follow the libertarian prescription that meddling in other’s business cannot be a good thing, no matter what Gaddafi did or didn’t do. There may be a bankers’ interest in Libya. I can’t see what US national interest is served.
Ajitvadakayil.blogspot.com gives the view of an Indian who lived in Libya under Mohammed Gaddafi:
“I am a sailor and have visited Libyan ports Misurata, Tripoli, Sidra,Benghazi several times over the past 4 decades. I don’t need BBC or CNN to tell me how it was there.
Libya under Mohammad Gaddafi was a stable and happy country. Yes, indeed Gaddafi was a dictator, who liberated his country from a tyrant and puppet to the West King Idris Sanussi.
A couple of my friends have served on ships flagged in Libya, with full Libyan crew. As early as the seventies SCI ( Indian National Shipping Company ) has an office in Libya.”
Vadakayil suggests the Libyan uprising, which Assange took credit for, was simply a provocation and a pretext for nothing more than a bloodthirsty, racist war for oil and the control of the banking system:
“Petrol and diesel was dirt cheap at 13 US cents. This will never be the same again, as the West has now spread its tentacles and will siphon off Libya’s oil, by putting grease money in the Rothschild’s Swiss banks for new leaders who will all be puppets. As of today the gasoline is 32 times more expensive, than what it was 8 months ago.
9) All farmers who would produce were given FREE land, and equipment. Livestock was given free too.
10) On 1st July 2011 , 2 million people rallied in Libya expressing support to Gaddafi. Videos and reports of the count are there all over internet. This was 1/3 of Libya’s population.
11) The Central Bank of Libya was state owned, and NOT a Rothschild controlled bank or IMF stooge.
12) Food and infrastructure was subsidised.
Gaddafi’s dictator ship was a form of direct democracy, unlike Arabian oil rich kingdoms supported by the West, because they are their type of dictators.
If Gaddafi was indeed so unpopular with his people why has it taken NATO 8 months to dislodge him with rebels having superior weapons. Why did it take NATO 26.000 air missions and 150 US drone strikes?
The second biggest mistake he made was to try and start a new currency THE GOLD DINAR, to upstage the Dollar and the Euro, in collaboration with Arab and African countries for oil transactions . Th real reason of revolution was NOT Libyan people’s discontent , but IMF and Rothschild bankers discontent, who cannot tolerate plummeting Dollars and Euros.
The biggest mistake Gaddafi made was to warm up to the friendly overtures of West leaders in the recent past and allow NGOs funded by foreign bankers into his country. A lot of security private agencies cropped up mysteriously.
So weeks before the invasion of NATO controlled rebels, a new National Central bank was created under the control of Rothschild bankers and IMF. Are we to believe that uneducated rebels running around with huge NATO provided guns , screaming Allaho Akbar made this bank, in a jiffy?
There has been open ethnic cleansing of BLACK SKINNED PEOPLE by the NATO supported rebel forces all over Libya, which only the Wall Street Journal had the guts to expose.”
(Lila: I added the link and tidied up some of the typos/errors. Also, I can’t vouch for his assertions, some of which are exaggerated. I just find them an interesting contrast from citizen opinion in the west).
This blog entry reinforces my own sense of what happened in Libya, but since I have become increasingly suspicious of anything that comes out of the Western media that I haven’t studied myself, I haven’t posted anything about the intervention before.
But here is an ordinary citizen from India, well-versed in the mechanism of central bank control, who actually lived in Libya, claiming that Libya was raped at the behest of human rights “liberventionists,” with the connivance of Human Rights groups.
To give him credit, Assange condemned Nato’s intervention flatly, as exceeding the UN mandate.
But, of course, if Assange were an NWO asset, as I’ve wondered, there would be nothing unexpected in his distancing himself from the bloody outcome of a revolt that, if we are to believe him, he had a hand in starting.
At LRC blog Daniel McAdams writes,
“The savage torture and murder of former Libyan leader Gaddafi was on full display today to a bloodthirsty world. His capture was a curiously familiar tale: he was “caught like a rat” in a hole. Just like Saddam. One wonders which NGO was subcontracted to write these scripts.
It was perhaps fitting that Gaddafi’s final end was precipitated by a Predator drone strike courtesy of the US military as he attempted to escape his hometown of Sirte. It was NATO, after all, that has murdered the entire country.
French filmmaker Julien Teil’s incredible film, “The Humanitarian War in Libya: There is no Evidence,” lays out very clearly the truth behind the mountain of lies manipulated by NATO to justify its attack on Libya. In the film, the director of the Swiss-based Libyan League for Human Rights, Soliman Bouchuiguir, emerges as the key individual who initiated the UN action against Libya.
In February of this year, the Libyan League, along with the US Government-funded National Endowment for Democracy and 70 other NGOs, sent the initial petition to the UN for the suspension of Libya from the UN Human Rights Council. The petition was based on Bouchuiguir’s claims alone that some 6,000 had been killed by Gaddafi’s regime. Bouchuiguir provided the UN with lurid tales of Gaddafi’s “scorched earth policy” and his militia’s “massive attacks against civilians.” These acts are “crimes against humanity,” he testified to the UN. On May 31, Bouchuiguir’s NGO reported a staggering 18,000 murdered, 46,000 wounded, 28,000 missing, 1,600 rapes, and 150,000 refugees at the hands of the Gaddafi regime. Asked in the film where he got his figures, he replied that he got them from the National Transitional Council — the rebels!
It was this petition and Bouchuiguir’s claims that were the basis for everything that was to come, culminating in the NATO destruction of Libya and today’s bloody murder of Gaddafi and his entourage. The United Nations did not investigate Bouchuiguir’s claims before they were used by the UN Security Council to bolster their efforts to pass UN Security Council Resolution 1973, opening the door to NATO bombs!
In the film, Bouchuiguir is pressed to advise journalists who go to Libya how they can document his claims about the Gaddafi regime. I hate to be a film spoiler, but in the climax of the film we can see Bouchuiguir asked again and again for evidence to back up his claims. Finally, without a bit of shame, he flatly states, “there is no evidence.”
Libya was bombed by NATO based on a dirty lie. Just like Iraq. Now the sights are all set on Syria. Does anyone care?
(Thanks to Tony Cartalucci’s terrific blog, Land Destroyer, for originally writing about this film.)
I looked up the Libyan League for Human Rights.
The website of the Geneva-based outfit explicitly invokes the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (which, as I blogged earlier, is part of the new “human rights” rationale for intervention, one that is far more expansive than traditional realpolitik considerations).
“Please note that the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), based in Washington, D.C., was at the root of this international crime against the government and people of Libya. NED also funded and helped organize the failed coup attempt against President Chavez in 2002 and many other U.S. violations of the sovereignty of nations.”
TruthIsTreason.net analyzes the Libyan story:
“The very nature of the Benghazi rebels has been deceptively presented to the public. In fact, they are a collection of extremists and mercenaries, many of whom had been fighting recently in Iraq and Afghanistan against US forces. These mercenaries, who have been backed by the CIA and MI6 for the last 30 years (see time line), are being portrayed as an “an indigenous political force” opposing Libya’s government. It has just been recently revealed that the rebel commander attempting to seize Tripoli is none other than Abdelhakim Belhadj, an Al Qaeda asset who was previously captured by in Malaysia, tortured by the CIA in Bangkok, Thailand in 2003, before being release back in Libya where he is now fighting on behalf of NATO.Additional disinformation comes in the form of media attempts to portray Qaddafi as a rambling madman who despite the disparagement, has turned out to be one of the few heads of state speaking any truth at all regarding the conflict besieging his nation. From his earlier claims that the uprising was foreign backed Al Qaeda, to now verified claims that the rebellion was nothing more than a means to usher in a foreign occupation and the despoiling of Libya’s resources, he has been spot on.
As rebels loot his home and his compound in central Tripoli, he is now being disingenuously portrayed as an opulent tyrant who hoarded state resources at the cost of his population. Betraying the duplicity of this lie is the UN’s own Human Development Index which lists Libya as one of the most developed nations in Africa and is ranked higher than many other nations including Russia, Brazil, Saudi Arabia, and Malaysia. Quite obviously Libya’s oil wealth was put to good use, and as Libya has ensured the West’s nefarious corporate-funded NGOs were excluded from Libyan society, no other explanation for Libya’s development exists beyond the government’s own initiatives.What we are witnessing in Libya is a concerted, admitted war of aggression by corporate-financier interests who have openly conspired to carry out a campaign of military and economic conquest throughout the Middle East (and beyond), including Northern Africa and specifically including Libya. From Wesley Clark’s 2007 speech, to Newsweeks’ 1981 article, we have been handed a signed confession that “our” governments are the true enemies of free humanity, masking their agenda with the thinnest veneer of moral justification, almost as if to insult the intelligence of so many who eagerly continue to empower them as they maliciously move forward. Once again, we must commit ourselves to identifying the corporate-financier interests truly driving this agenda, lurking behind the military and political leaders paraded before us as the executors of “international policy.” We must also commit to boycotting and replacing these corporate-financier interests as well as ending the recognition of any of the legitimacy they endlessly heap upon themselves.”