Jump to content
The Education Forum

Libyan Rebels Round Up Blacks, Put Them In Prison Camps


Steven Gaal
 Share

Recommended Posts

Libyan Rebels Round Up Blacks, Put Them In Prison Camps

NATO-backed Libyan rebels are rounding up thousands of innocent black migrants and taking them to prison camps as part of mass reprisals that include reports of indiscriminate killings, mistreatment and torture, as the humanitarian veneer of the wests military intervention quickly crumbles.

Migrant blacks and sub-Saharan Africans comprise one third of the entire Libyan population, and a minority were hired by Gaddafi as mercenary fighters, but rebels are treating them all as enemy combatants, with reports of abuse, murders and mass arrests increasing in volume.

OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOooooooooOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Paul Joseph Watson

Prison Planet

NATO-backed Libyan rebels are rounding up thousands of innocent black migrants and taking them to prison camps as part of mass reprisals that include reports of indiscriminate killings, mistreatment and torture, as the humanitarian veneer of the wests military intervention quickly crumbles.

Migrant blacks and sub-Saharan Africans comprise one third of the entire Libyan population, and a minority were hired by Gaddafi as mercenary fighters, but rebels are treating them all as enemy combatants, with reports of abuse, murders and mass arrests increasing in volume.

Rebel forces and armed civilians are rounding up thousands of black Libyans and migrants from sub-Sahara Africa, accusing them of fighting for ousted strongman Moammar Gadhafi and holding them in makeshift jails across the capital, reports the Associated Press.

The AP story notes that virtually all of the victims are innocent migrant workers and have not fought for Gaddafi, but rebels are still rounding them up and interning them in sports stadiums and other prison camps simply on the basis of their skin color.

At least 5,000 men have been detained, but human rights groups put the figure far higher.

However, the abuse goes way beyond mass roundups. African Union chairman Jean Ping told the Washington Post there was clear evidence of reprisal murders. They are killing people, normal workers, mistreating them, he stated. The story also relates how 500 Darfuris are are desperately trying to get out of Libya…. they very much fear for their lives because of the color of their skin, according to Richard Sollom, deputy director of Physicians for Human Rights.

Amnesty International investigators have also witnessed abuses at the Central Tripoli Hospital, including men being dragged from hospital beds and detained, while also witnessing unidentified dead bodies of black men being transported to the morgue.

The London Independent also reported on how Amnesty representatives witnessed rebels dumping the decomposing bodies of 30 men, almost all of them black, after they were killed outside a makeshift hospital which bore the symbol of the Islamic Crescent.

The killings have been spurred by apparently overblown, or downright false rumors that Gaddafi had hired black African mercenaries from Chad and elsewhere to act as executioners of Libyan civilians, gunning them down in cold blood during protests, writes Rick Moran.

The potential for abuse, torture and indiscriminate killings of black migrant Libyans to escalate into a substantial program of racial ethnic cleansing carried out by radical Islamist rebels, who are being led by Al-Qaeda terrorists, is why the African Union has refused to support NATOs act of regime change.

LINK http://www.prisonplanet.com/libyan-rebels-round-up-blacks-put-them-in-prison-camps.html

Edited by Steven Gaal
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Libyan Rebels Round Up Blacks, Put Them In Prison Camps

NATO-backed Libyan rebels are rounding up thousands of innocent black migrants and taking them to prison camps as part of mass reprisals that include reports of indiscriminate killings, mistreatment and torture, as the “humanitarian” veneer of the west’s military intervention quickly crumbles.

Migrant blacks and sub-Saharan Africans comprise one third of the entire Libyan population, and a minority were hired by Gaddafi as mercenary fighters, but rebels are treating them all as enemy combatants, with reports of abuse, murders and mass arrests increasing in volume.

OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOooooooooOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Paul Joseph Watson

Prison Planet

NATO-backed Libyan rebels are rounding up thousands of innocent black migrants and taking them to prison camps as part of mass reprisals that include reports of indiscriminate killings, mistreatment and torture, as the “humanitarian” veneer of the west’s military intervention quickly crumbles.

Migrant blacks and sub-Saharan Africans comprise one third of the entire Libyan population, and a minority were hired by Gaddafi as mercenary fighters, but rebels are treating them all as enemy combatants, with reports of abuse, murders and mass arrests increasing in volume.

“Rebel forces and armed civilians are rounding up thousands of black Libyans and migrants from sub-Sahara Africa, accusing them of fighting for ousted strongman Moammar Gadhafi and holding them in makeshift jails across the capital,” reports the Associated Press.

The AP story notes that virtually all of the victims are innocent migrant workers and have not fought for Gaddafi, but rebels are still rounding them up and interning them in sports stadiums and other prison camps simply on the basis of their skin color.

At least 5,000 men have been detained, but human rights groups put the figure far higher.

However, the abuse goes way beyond mass roundups. African Union chairman Jean Ping told the Washington Post there was clear evidence of reprisal murders. “They are killing people, normal workers, mistreating them,” he stated. The story also relates how 500 Darfuris are “ are desperately trying to get out of Libya…. they very much fear for their lives because of the color of their skin,” according to Richard Sollom, deputy director of Physicians for Human Rights.

Amnesty International investigators have also witnessed abuses at the Central Tripoli Hospital, “including men being dragged from hospital beds and detained,” while also witnessing unidentified dead bodies of black men being transported to the morgue.

The London Independent also reported on how Amnesty representatives witnessed rebels dumping the decomposing bodies of 30 men, almost all of them black, after they were killed outside a makeshift hospital which bore the symbol of the Islamic Crescent.

The killings have been spurred by “apparently overblown, or downright false” rumors “that Gaddafi had hired black African mercenaries from Chad and elsewhere to act as executioners of Libyan civilians, gunning them down in cold blood during protests,” writes Rick Moran.

The potential for abuse, torture and indiscriminate killings of black migrant Libyans to escalate into a substantial program of racial ethnic cleansing carried out by radical Islamist rebels, who are being led by Al-Qaeda terrorists, is why the African Union has refused to support NATO’s act of regime change.

LINK http://www.prisonpla...ison-camps.html

How can the fact that Gadhafi hired Sub-Sahara mercenaries be excused as a false rumor? They comprised most of Gadhafi's army in the final days of the fighting and acknowledged that they were told they were fighting al Qaeda and foreign invaders, when in fact they were foreigners in Libya paid by Gadhafi to fight Libians?

See what they did to the city of Misratha for five months and then you won't wonder why there was such a backlash against the foreign mercenaries.

This was one of Cynthia McKinney's biggest bullcraps lines, along with the idea that Imperialists enslaved Africans, when in fact the US Navy was begun because black African Barbary state pirates enslaved Americans taken from merchant ships in the Mediterranean who were sold at auction at the Tripoli slave mart.

The Libyan rebels freed thousands of prisoners from prisons, and are arresting those who committed crimes, such as the former mayor of Benghazi who hung political prisoners in a basketball gym in front of young students. Lesson learned.

Where were all the humanitarians when the black sub-Sahara mercenaries were butchering the people of Misratha?

Silent. Just like you.

Now there are dozens if not hundreds of western journalists in Libya and Tripoli and if there were 5,000 black prisoners being rounded up we would

hear about it from them, and not from some idiot from Prison Planet, sitting at home in front of his computer and spreading false rumors.

Yea, find out what happened to the mercenaries who were paid by Gadhafi to kill Libyans and let me know what they were doing in Libya in the first place.

Revolutionary Program

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's the entire article, from the person on the ground in Tripoli who wrote it, instead of the bastardized version you posted from Prison Planet.

Most if not all of the thousands of prisoners freed by the rebels got a free ride - even if they were criminals - they got the opportunity to start again in a new Libya.

Now the rebels are after those who killed their families, friends and comrades - and the mercenaries are a target.

Unfortunately I know Americans who feel the same way about illegal Mexicans in USA.

By HADEEL AL-SHALCHI and KARINLAUB<br orgfontsize="12px">Associated Press

TRIPOLI, Libya(AP) - A Ghanaian teacher cowers in his house, certain he will be grabbed at acheckpoint because of his dark skin. Armed rebels detain 19 Ukrainian cooks andoil workers for several days on unsupported claims that they are really snipersfor Moammar Gadhafi.

They're among thousands of foreigners caught in aweb of suspicion as rebel fighters pursue the remnants of Gadhafi's forces.Gadhafi hired some foreigners as mercenaries, but many others held ordinaryjobs in Libya, andthe rebels who ousted the Gadhafi regime from most of Tripoli lastmonth often seem to make little effort to tell them apart.

"How can we be snipers?" cook MaksimShadrov asked angrily at a training center for oil workers in Tripoli wherehe, his wife and 17 other Ukrainians were being held.

"They are old. She is a woman. We are notsnipers," he said, pointing to some members of his group. Even a rebelcommander conceded that he had no evidence to the contrary, but held themnonetheless, despite a diplomat's efforts to free them.

In rebel-run Tripoli, peoplewith dark skin - even Libyans - are at risk because Gadhafi is known to haverecruited soldiers from sub-Saharan Africa.

"Every black is a target," said TonyBiney, the Ghanaian teacher, who stayed home with his wife for two weeks beforerisking a trip to church.

There have been widespread arrests and frequentabuse of migrant workers since the rebels seized Tripoli latelast month, Human Rights Watch said Sunday, but did not give an estimate of thenumber of detainees. The group said the clampdown created "a grave senseof fear among the city's African population."

A rebel official estimated that some 5,000 peoplehave been detained since rebels seized Tripoli. At onemakeshift detention camp, conditions for Libyan detainees were acceptable, butsub-Saharan Africans were held in overcrowded cells with a putrid stench, HumanRights Watch said. The detainees complained of a lack of water and poorsanitation.

The detentions have created an image problem forthe rebel leadership, which relies heavily on Western support and has pledgedto build a new Libya basedon the rule of law, in contrast to Gadhafi's brutal regime.

The harsh treatment could also cause problems forthe rebels as they attempt to rebuild Libya'seconomy, which has depended heavily on foreign workers to keep up with its oilboom. However, the draw of steady, well-paid employment may in the end bestronger than the fear of mistreatment.

Before the six-month civil war that brought downGadhafi, hundreds of thousands of foreigners filled jobs Libyans didn't want orweren't trained for, including in construction, oil and health services. Datais sketchy, but some estimates say at least 1.5 million foreigners worked in Libya, acountry of just 6 million.

The workers are mainly Africans, Asians andEastern Europeans, lured from economically depressed countries by Libya'srelatively high wages.

Hundreds of thousands of them fled Libya afterthe outbreak of fighting in February, many complaining at the time that they hadnot been paid or were robbed by Gadhafi troops on the way to the border. Otherswere either unable or unwilling to leave.

On Sunday, Human Rights Watch called on therebels to stop arbitrary arrests and to set up a system to review cases ofpeople alleged to be mercenaries. The New York-based group said it has evidencethat the Gadhafi regime recruited hundreds of mercenaries from Chad, Sudan andother countries - but noted that cannot serve as the basis for mass arrests.

The rebel leadership "has legitimateconcerns about unlawful mercenaries and violent activity, but it can't simplyarrest dark-skinned men just in case they think they might bemercenaries," said Sarah Leah Whitson of Human Rights Watch.

The rebels' National Transitional Council hascalled on fighters not to abuse prisoners and says those accused of crimes willreceive fair trials.

In one sign of possible change, an official forthe U.N.'s main refugee agency, Sam Cheung, said several dozen Somalis werereleased to his group Sunday.

"We are hoping this is a model, a firsttransaction," Cheung said.

The Philippines sent asenior diplomat to give some 1,700 Filipino workers, mostly nurses, the optionof leaving. A government official said four Filipino housemaids who worked fora Gadhafi relative will take the offer.

Some workers said they hadn't been harassed byeither side in the war. Others, including some of the Ukrainian detainees,planned to stay in Libya despitereceiving rough treatment.

"As you know, life in the Ukraine isbad," said Shadrov, the cook. "We came here to earn money for ourfamily."

The Ukrainians, hired by the Russian-Libyan oilcompany Dakara, arrived in Tripoli inJuly. After the rebels entered the capital on Aug. 21, the Ukrainians weredetained by rebel fighters, handcuffed and moved to various locations, Shadrovsaid.

"They took everything from us," hesaid. "Money, passports, computers, everything."

Othman bin Othman, the rebel commander in chargeof the oil workers' training center, initially said the Ukrainians were armedand trained as snipers, but changed his account after reporters interviewed thedetainees.

"To be very honest, we didn't find anyweapons in their houses or on them, but they arrived into the country illegallyand during a very sensitive time - after the war," he said. "This ledus to believe they were working for the enemy."

Diplomats from Russia and Ukraine visitedthe group, and Shadrov's father, a Russian citizen, was able to leave.

At a meeting with the rebels, the Ukrainianconsul was asked to bring back a written promise that if the Ukrainians areallowed to leave the detention center, they will stay in their homes and notleave the country without proper documentation.

Some of Gadhafi's real mercenaries, meanwhile,have already left.

Mohamed, a migrant worker from Mali, saidhe came to Libya in 2007and found work in restaurants and as a gardener.

Speaking in the Mali town ofBamako, hesaid he briefly joined a pro-Gadhafi militia after the outbreak of theuprising, and was sent to try to crush rebels in the port city of Misrata, astronghold of the revolt. He said he stopped fighting after a couple of weeksand returned to Mali.

Mohamed did not give his last name because hesaid did not want anyone to know he fought for Gadhafi. He said he still hasfamily in Libya and hasnot been able to get in touch with them for more than two weeks.

Biney, the Ghanaian teacher, and his wife, ahousekeeper, said they will stay in Libya. Theyneed the money.

They're continuing to keep a low profile, butleft their home Friday to make a quick dash to St. Francis Catholic Church indowntown Tripoli. Theyhired a driver for $90, a steep sum, they said, since they haven't worked orbeen paid for six months.

They did it, Vida Biney said, to say a prayer of thanksfor surviving the war.

"We are alive. We are grateful to God,"she said.

Edited by William Kelly
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This post I started I had in a file named Bill Kelly. Golly I was right.

********o********

Make No Mistake: NATO committed War Crimes in Libya

Make No Mistake: NATO committed War Crimes in Libya

Make No Mistake: NATO committed War Crimes in Libya

http://tv.globalresearch.ca/2011/08/make-no-mistake-nato-committed-war-crimes-libya

================================================================

link http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=26328

link http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=26329

link http://tv.globalresearch.ca/2011/09/tripoli-and-after-natorebel-liberation

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

#################################

ooooooooooxxxxxxxoooooooooooooooo

and http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=26255

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

%$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$%

Bill did you forget the prime directive ?? follow the $money$

While NATO members, led by France, piously proclaimed at the onset of their military offensive in Libya that their concerns were solely humanitarian, a covert tussle to gain a commanding lead in developing the country’s energy riches in light of Colonel Gaddafi’s departure is well underway.

The Libyan economy depends primarily upon revenues from the oil sector, which contribute about 95 percent of export earnings, 25 percent of GDP, and 80 percent of government revenue.

Prior to the outbreak of conflict, Libya was exporting about 1.3-1.4 million barrels per day from production estimated at roughly 1.79 million barrels per day, of which approximately 280,000 barrels per day were indigenously consumed. But analysts believe that with reconstruction Libya could soon be exporting 1.6 million barrels per day of high-quality, light crude.

But current production is the proverbial mere drop in the bucket. Libya has the largest proven oil reserves in Africa with 42 billion barrels of oil and over 1.3 trillion cubic meters of natural gas. Causing oil company executives from Houston to Beijing to drool on their Gucci loafers, only 25 percent of Libya’s territory has been explored to date for hydrocarbons.

Libya is already Europe’s single largest oil supplier, the second largest oil producer in Africa and the continent’s fourth largest natural gas supplier and already dominates the Southern Mediterranean’s petroleum sector. According to the Libyan National Oil Corporation (NOC), more than 50 international oil companies are already present in the Libyan market.

So, peering into Libya’s future, who’s actually ahead?

France, apparently.

On 3 April a letter was allegedly sent by Libya's National Transitional Council (NTC) to a coalition partner, Qatari Emir Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani, which mentioned that France would take "35 percent of crude oil...in exchange for its total and permanent support" of the NTC. France’s Liberation daily reported on Thursday that it had a copy of the letter, which stated that the NTC’s Information Minister Mahmoud Shammam, would negotiate the deal with France. In 2010 France was the second purchaser of Libyan oil after Italy, with over 15 percent of its “black gold” imported from Tripoli.

Zut alors!

The number one National Transition Council, Moustapha Abdeljalil recently reported that the States would be rewarded" according to support "given to the insurgents.

While NTC head Mustafa Abdel Jalil has not hidden the fact that the NTC would assign a higher priority for reconstruction and the allocation of oil contracts to countries that supported their uprising, remarking that nations would be rewarded "according to the support" given to the insurgents, the NTC’s UK representative, Guma al-Gamaty, said that future oil contracts would be granted "on the basis of merit, not patronage. The contracts will be concluded in a transparent manner. "

French Foreign Minister Alain Juppe solemnly denied during a radio interview any knowledge of a "formal" or specific deal but brightly added that it would be "logical" for countries like France, which helped the NTC in its struggle against Gaddafi, to take part in reconstruction.

French President Nicholas Sarkozy was the major European advocate for armed intervention in Libya and his administration was the first officially to recognize the NTC as "the sole, legitimate representative of the Libyan people" and the country’s sole governmental authority, as well as lobbying other nations to recognize the NTC.

Seeking a share of “la gloire,” France was also the first state to commence attacks on 19 March against Gaddafi’s armed forces in Benghazi and along with fellow NATO member Britain, have since provided the majority of the military equipment and personnel used during NATO’s operations in Libya. Going into grey areas of international law in its eagerness to oust Gaddafi France also supplied some weaponry to opposition forces in Libya, a move that came under harsh criticism because of the total arms embargo imposed by the UN Security Council on arms deliveries to any side in the conflict.

NTC’s Paris-based envoy Mansour Sayf al-Nasr denied that such a letter had been sent or that any such pledge had been given. But no one was backpedalling more furiously than Information Minister Shammam, who intoned that such an arrangement was unthinkable.

“It's a joke. It's false,” Shammam said.

Well, if you cannot believe an Information Minister, who can you trust? Sleazy journalists? It will certainly be interesting to see how the issue plays out in the days ahead, and if France does indeed get it 35 percent cut of the loot, which at present production rates, would average about 500,000 barrels per day.

John C.K. Daly of OilPrice.com

Global Research Articles by John C. K. Daly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First it was blacks now its oil.

I don't question any of those facts. Oil is what Libya is all about to those who want it.

And as soon as they get their oil back on track and through the pipes our gas prices will go down and everyone will benefit.

You have to read the whole story, not just the parts that make you feel good.

But the Libyan rebel freedom fighters - of whom many thousands fearless died, didn't fight and die for oil.

They fought and died for something more personal to them.

This post I started I had in a file named Bill Kelly. Golly I was right.

********o********

Make No Mistake: NATO committed War Crimes in Libya

Make No Mistake: NATO committed War Crimes in Libya

Make No Mistake: NATO committed War Crimes in Libya

http://tv.globalrese...ar-crimes-libya

================================================================

link http://www.globalres...xt=va&aid=26328

link http://www.globalres...xt=va&aid=26329

link http://tv.globalrese...ebel-liberation

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

#################################

ooooooooooxxxxxxxoooooooooooooooo

and http://www.globalres...xt=va&aid=26255

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

%$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$%

Bill did you forget the prime directive ?? follow the $money$

While NATO members, led by France, piously proclaimed at the onset of their military offensive in Libya that their concerns were solely humanitarian, a covert tussle to gain a commanding lead in developing the country's energy riches in light of Colonel Gaddafi's departure is well underway.

The Libyan economy depends primarily upon revenues from the oil sector, which contribute about 95 percent of export earnings, 25 percent of GDP, and 80 percent of government revenue.

Prior to the outbreak of conflict, Libya was exporting about 1.3-1.4 million barrels per day from production estimated at roughly 1.79 million barrels per day, of which approximately 280,000 barrels per day were indigenously consumed. But analysts believe that with reconstruction Libya could soon be exporting 1.6 million barrels per day of high-quality, light crude.

But current production is the proverbial mere drop in the bucket. Libya has the largest proven oil reserves in Africa with 42 billion barrels of oil and over 1.3 trillion cubic meters of natural gas. Causing oil company executives from Houston to Beijing to drool on their Gucci loafers, only 25 percent of Libya's territory has been explored to date for hydrocarbons.

Libya is already Europe's single largest oil supplier, the second largest oil producer in Africa and the continent's fourth largest natural gas supplier and already dominates the Southern Mediterranean's petroleum sector. According to the Libyan National Oil Corporation (NOC), more than 50 international oil companies are already present in the Libyan market.

So, peering into Libya's future, who's actually ahead?

France, apparently.

On 3 April a letter was allegedly sent by Libya's National Transitional Council (NTC) to a coalition partner, Qatari Emir Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani, which mentioned that France would take "35 percent of crude oil...in exchange for its total and permanent support" of the NTC. France's Liberation daily reported on Thursday that it had a copy of the letter, which stated that the NTC's Information Minister Mahmoud Shammam, would negotiate the deal with France. In 2010 France was the second purchaser of Libyan oil after Italy, with over 15 percent of its "black gold" imported from Tripoli.

Zut alors!

The number one National Transition Council, Moustapha Abdeljalil recently reported that the States would be rewarded" according to support "given to the insurgents.

While NTC head Mustafa Abdel Jalil has not hidden the fact that the NTC would assign a higher priority for reconstruction and the allocation of oil contracts to countries that supported their uprising, remarking that nations would be rewarded "according to the support" given to the insurgents, the NTC's UK representative, Guma al-Gamaty, said that future oil contracts would be granted "on the basis of merit, not patronage. The contracts will be concluded in a transparent manner. "

French Foreign Minister Alain Juppe solemnly denied during a radio interview any knowledge of a "formal" or specific deal but brightly added that it would be "logical" for countries like France, which helped the NTC in its struggle against Gaddafi, to take part in reconstruction.

French President Nicholas Sarkozy was the major European advocate for armed intervention in Libya and his administration was the first officially to recognize the NTC as "the sole, legitimate representative of the Libyan people" and the country's sole governmental authority, as well as lobbying other nations to recognize the NTC.

Seeking a share of "la gloire," France was also the first state to commence attacks on 19 March against Gaddafi's armed forces in Benghazi and along with fellow NATO member Britain, have since provided the majority of the military equipment and personnel used during NATO's operations in Libya. Going into grey areas of international law in its eagerness to oust Gaddafi France also supplied some weaponry to opposition forces in Libya, a move that came under harsh criticism because of the total arms embargo imposed by the UN Security Council on arms deliveries to any side in the conflict.

NTC's Paris-based envoy Mansour Sayf al-Nasr denied that such a letter had been sent or that any such pledge had been given. But no one was backpedalling more furiously than Information Minister Shammam, who intoned that such an arrangement was unthinkable.

"It's a joke. It's false," Shammam said.

Well, if you cannot believe an Information Minister, who can you trust? Sleazy journalists? It will certainly be interesting to see how the issue plays out in the days ahead, and if France does indeed get it 35 percent cut of the loot, which at present production rates, would average about 500,000 barrels per day.

John C.K. Daly of OilPrice.com

Global Research Articles by John C. K. Daly

Edited by William Kelly
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Libya to become just like a failed Iraq,IMHO Steven Gaal

***************************************

"the outcome in Iraq remains uncertain",Ayad Allawi, a former prime minister of Iraq, leads the largest political

bloc in Iraq’s Parliament.(article by him after Waduge)

oooooooooooooooo********ooooooooooooooooooo

0000000000000000000+000000000000000000000

The “democracy” denied to Iraq & lessons for nations been overthrown

Posted on August 29th, 2011

Shenali Waduge

----------oo

Iraq was invaded illegally, occupied illegally & Saddam Hussein its erstwhile leader was sentenced to death illegally. That was the West’s democracy for Iraq. That the West freed Iraq from its “dictator” was all that really mattered & post-war Iraq in short is nothing but miserable. Dissent in Saddam’s rule might have meant death, democracy post-Saddam means one can talk but no one listens or reacts. Where lies the difference for the people?

The Iraq war was a concocted one. The strategy used was the excuse of weapons of mass destruction while a puppet-UN endorsed inspectors & slapped the country with numerous resolutions, trade embargoes & sanctions, the very ingredients that lay the foundations for leadership change in countries. All these notions were orchestrated to perfection with international media playing their part by ensuring that their countrymen & opposition legislatures backed the calls for invasions. Locally, infiltration of people, arousing of public emotions was easy to garner in a country that had warring factions within (Sunni-Shiates) & people who could easily be aroused to think that deposing Saddam would usher in a new era & a new beginning for them. The stage was set & the drama unfolded with sensationalized stories telecast the world over with journalists & media competing for the best coverage & relaying of on the spot news.

A dictator becomes a “dictator” abhorred by his countrymen when he has overused his authority & power. These are good lessons for such leaders overstepping their power because they have come to equate power as their right. Such have been the countries that the West have been quick to ear mark & target for overthrowing these countries has been an easy effort to enter & dislodge these leaders. It is these very citizens who end up helping the overthrow take place, thus the non-requirement for stretched military equipment or personnel & the use of their own to minimize the casualties to their own countrymen. Collateral damage is what the West would call this. The countries where these leaders become “dictators” are often rich in natural resources which are one reason why they end up misusing the mandate given to them & becoming power hungry & their stooges & families end up devastating the country to which they are supposed to function as custodians.

Therefore, Iraq & all other countries of the world need to realize that the leaders that they vote must lead only for a certain term only, that there is a limit to misusing his own country wealth at the cost of the tax payers money & that any time more than that in office naturally leans towards bad & unethical leadership practices. It is a natural phenomena but one that is being artfully used to effect a far worse dictatorship through the arrival of Western neo-capitalist regime totally degrading society & the countries that the West occupy & overthrow. Most of these very countries have all been previously occupied during colonial times which has meant most of their natural resources have been fleeced & the current trend is to repeat that same policy once more.

We are all aware that the West did the unpardonable in the manner it invaded & occupied Iraq & the objective was never about destroying weapons of mass destruction or even ridding the country of Saddam & most importantly liberating its people. As a one time CIA agent, it would not have been difficult for Saddam to function in a similar role once more & Saddam himself until his last days may have revisited his own past & his own guilt at the wrongs to his own people, to the people of Iran & Kuwait must surely have haunted him.

If we are to believe the telecasts by international media & the journalists on ground during the last days prior to the fall of Iraqi forces & the capture of Saddam Hussain, viewers would be awed by the public outcry for the capture of Saddam & more importantly the jubilation of the Allied troops that had come to save them. If any country should be saved by the West it should be Palestinians suffering in Gaza for years as a result of Israeli. What does the US do instead – it vetoes Resolutions brought against Israel in the UN.

Now here lies the anticlimax & this is where the crux of the invasions & overthrowing actually rests.

Governments, leaders, dictators or whatever other names the West calls these people ruling a nation have been overthrown in carefully orchestrated maneuverings & operations on the grounds that the people of these countries are promised “freedom”, “democracy”, a new life, a new beginning, to be treated like humans….& now comes the most important question what type of “democracy” & “freedom” or a better life have these people got or been given by the West after they have overthrown the “dictator”?

It is the lack of answering this all important question that demands the West not to use these false clichés of “freedom from dictators” as an excuse. No sooner these “dictators” are overthrown the first thing the West ends up doing is to tap the natural resources, take over the economic hubs & privatize all channels that will supply their countries a steady flow of monetary returns & economic gain. All those who played an indirect role in aiding the West by providing support end up just turning their heads away. Therefore, when we all know Iraq was a mistake it is good to now ask whether Libya is going to be another – where the consequences to the future of the people of these countries were never part of the strategy or overall plan!

Let us look at things from the people’s perspective. In Iraq, naturally a large number of Iraqi’s suffered from Saddam in a country divided by tribal factions whether they all belonged to the Islam faith. Therefore, when developed countries like US, UK & its allies made it known publicly that they were going to free the Iraqi people from a dictator who would object? It is what they got in return for that jubilation that actually matters post-Saddam & it is the guilt that these countries did not deliver & more importantly never really planned to deliver is what matters in this whole exercise of overthrowing Governments.

What makes the reality far worse is that UN bodies & international media two supposedly “independent” bodies simply watch these same blueprints take place repeatedly in different parts of the continent & the numbers are rising & what is worse is that these “independent” bodies have become part of this exercise itself.

Do people of this world have anywhere they can reach out for justice? NO.

Iraq is a failure because there was never a plan to rebuild Iraq. A country like US & UK & its allies do not commit trillions of dollars if all areas & angles are not calculated & looked at. There are think tanks & strategists & counter strategists that look at different ways countries & leaders can be overcome. There is no one plan in place & for every plan there is always immediate alternatives therefore it is very clear that all that was planned in the invasion was the deposing of Saddam Hussein. The occupation has been only a strategic goalpost to show that America has the mettle to exist in the Middle East. Operation Libya cannot be far different. The mistake if any is to supply arms to Libyans & the dangers of that mistake may be seen in the forthcoming days if not now as it appears no one knows who is shooting whom. Libya is a risk to the US who has pocketed $1.3trillion for the Iraq & Afghanistan operation. All these investments are likely to see their fruits only in future. In Kosovo now independent almost all its oil now belong to US interests, those that were euphoric about “freedom” find themselves unemployed or employed as prostitutes as it has become the city of the red light trade. Bombings means a boost to the construction trade & US construction industry will see a boom just like they experienced in Iraq. US security firms will also be flourishing just like they did in Iraq. In 2007, there were 180,000 US private contractors working in Iraq. This is capitalism at its best being practiced at the cost of innocent civilians who have jumped from the frying pan into the fire!

As of Jun 2011, there are 46,000 US troops in Iraq. All other nations have withdrawn their troops. It is estimated that civilians deaths hover around 600,000. If death by Saddam was feared, since February 2004 daily insurgent attacks have risen drastically & on some days over 150 deaths have taken place. Since US occupation in 2001 there have been 2.2million internally displaced Iraqis while a further 2.25m are living as refugees in Syria & Jordan. There is no demand for resettlement or rehabilitation by any world body upon the US or its allies certainly not like that which Sri Lanka is experiencing despite within a short span of 2 years resettling almost 96% of all internally displaced Tamils. Iraqi unemployment rate is almost 60%. 28% of Iraqi children are suffering from chronic malnutrition. 70% of Iraqi’s are without adequate water supplies.

The best example for the loss of Iraqi people’s freedom can be seen in the fact that 40% of Iraqi professionals have left the country since 2003. Where there were 34,000 physicians before 2003, by 2005, 12000 had left Iraq & 2000 had been murdered. Where is the freedom that the Iraqi’s had been promised? Freedom for Iraqi’s does not connote to mean that they all flee their country!

What of the US troops themselves. Over 32,000 have been wounded with over 20% having serious brain & spinal injuries. Over 30% of US troops are suffering mental health problems. Does any of these ills really matter to administrations or the real culprits that bankroll all the ills that take place around the world. Political leaders unfortunately are in reality just stooges themselves & that is the anticlimax about democracy…..a lot of nice words & clichés but nothing more.

Let us now wonder what the people of Libya think. Gaddafi was no CIA puppet. He was allied to countries & movements fighting imperialism. He nationalized oil & developed the Libyan economy. Libya is Africa’s 3rd largest oil producer & has 44.3billion barrels. The punishment was the bombing of Libya in 1986 killing his infant daughter which not many media cared to even publish. Knowing the threats to Libya Gaddafi even opened Libya’s economy to foreign banks, corporations & agreed to the infamous IMF SAP programs of privatizing state enterprises & cutting state subsidies on food….Sri Lanka please take note. As a result Libyans are suffering from the same high prices & unemployment other countries that are having “rebellions” are suffering from. The NTC that is spearheading the calls for “freedom” in Libya are all long-standing agents of imperialism…Sri Lanka too has its set of such agents.

It is not hard to deduce that all of the efforts to overthrow Governments whatever type of governance has taken place in these countries are done so purely on the basis of acquiring the wealth of these nations. The calls for removal of these “despots” or “dictators” are mere slogans helped greatly by the mass media that provides the visuals of sensationalism to justify the overthrowing by painting the perfect picture of saviors against despots. It took no time for Mubarak of Egypt, the one time darling of the West to be portrayed with so much hatred by the media with no reminder to the public that he was an agent of the West. This is what is likely to happen to all other political leaders who think they will remain the darlings of the West & continue corrupt leadership.

In any democracy where people come to power on the strength of a vote it is natural that almost half the nation will not vote in favor of the overall winner. This is certainly not basis for any country to say that a leader is opposed & plans set to overthrow him.

The countries that are currently earmarked for regime change will know from diplomatic statements where their countries are heading for & this alone should suffice to ensure the country is set in order & issues that are likely to be used as excuses are properly taken care of. Corruption being one excuse is a perfect area to ensure that politicians, their stooges & the corrupt public service immediately function as they should & not as they want to run for the repercussions are far more dangerous in the present context. Sri Lanka & Sri Lankans in particular need to be cautious at all times. There are none more patriotic than one’s own countrymen & we must remember this always. Outsourcing freedom should never be a prerogative at any time.

WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWXXXXXXXXooooooooXXXXXXXXWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW***

==========================================================***

The Forgotten Battlefield

Published: 5 settembre 2011

------------------oo

By Ayad Allawi

Ayad Allawi, a former prime minister ofIraq, leads the largest political

bloc in Iraq’s Parliament.

As the Arab Spring drives change across our region, bringing the hope of

democracy and reform to millions of Arabs, less attention is being paid to

the plight of Iraq and its people. We were the first to transition from

dictatorship to democracy, but the outcome in Iraq remains uncertain. Our

transition could be a positive agent for progress, and against the forces of

extremism, or a dangerous precedent that bodes ill for the region and the

international community.

Debate rages in Baghdad and Washington around conditions for a U.S. troop

extension beyond the end of this year. While such an extension may be

necessary, that alone will not address the fundamental problems festering in

Iraq. Those issues present a growing risk to Middle East stability and the

world community. The original U.S. troop “surge” was meant to create the

atmosphere for national political reconciliation and the rebuilding of

Iraq’s institutions and infrastructure. But those have yet to happen.

More than eight years after Saddam Hussein’s regime was overthrown, basic

services are in a woeful state: Most of the country has only a few hours of

electricity a day. Blackouts were increasingly common this summer. Oil

exports, still Iraq’s only source of income, are barely more than they were

when Hussein was toppled. The government has squandered the boon of high oil

prices and failed to create real and sustainable job growth. Iraq’s economy

has become an ever more dysfunctional mix of cronyism and mismanagement,

with high unemployment and endemic corruption. Transparency International

ranks Iraq the world’s fourth-most-corrupt country and by far the worst in

the Middle East.

The promise of improved security has been empty, with sectarianism on the

rise. The Pentagon recently reported an alarming rise in attacks, which it

blamed on Iranian-backed militias. The latest report to Congress by the U.S.

special inspector general for Iraqi reconstruction notes that June was the

bloodiest month for U.S. troops since 2008 and concludes that Iraq is more

dangerous than it was a year ago. Regrettably, Iraq’s nascent security

forces are riddled with sectarianism and mixed loyalties; they are barely

capable of defending themselves, let alone the rest of the country.

Despite failing to win the most seats in last year’s elections, Prime

Minister Nouri al-Maliki clung to power through a combination of Iranian

support and U.S. compliance. He now shows an alarming disregard for

democratic principles and the rule of law. Vital independent institutions

such as the election commission, the transparency commission and Iraq’s

central bank have been ordered to report directly to the office of the prime

minister. Meanwhile, Maliki refuses to appoint consensus candidates as

defense and interior ministers, as per last year’s power-sharing agreement.

The government is using blatant dictatorial tactics and intimidation to

quell opposition, ignoring the most basic human rights. Human Rights Watch

reported in February on secret torture prisons under Maliki’s authority. In

June, it exposed the government’s use of hired thugs to beat, stab and even

sexually assault peaceful demonstrators in Baghdad who were complaining

about corruption and poor services. These horrors are reminiscent of

autocratic responses to demonstrations by failing regimes elsewhere in the

region, and a far cry from the freedom and democracy promised in the new

Iraq.

Is this really what the United States sacrificed more than 4,000 young men

and women, and hundreds of billions of dollars, to build?

The trend of failure is becoming irreversible. Simply put, Iraq’s failure

would render every U.S. and international policy objective in the Middle

East difficult to achieve, if not impossible. From combating terrorism to

nuclear containment to energy security to the Middle East peace process,

Iraq is at the center. Our country is rapidly becoming a counterweight to

all positive efforts to address these issues, instead of the regional role

model for democracy, pluralism and a successful economy that it was supposed

to be.

It is not too late to reverse course. But the time to act is now. Extending

the U.S. troop presence will achieve nothing on its own. More concerted

political engagement is required at the highest levels to guarantee the

promise of freedom and progress made to the Iraqi people, who have suffered

and sacrificed so much and are running out of patience.

It is necessary, and achievable, to insist on full and proper implementation

of the power-sharing agreement of 2010, with proper checks and balances to

prevent abuse of power, and full formation of the government and its

institutions on a nonsectarian basis. Malign regional influences must be

counterbalanced. Failing these steps, new elections free from foreign

meddling, and with a truly independent judiciary and election commission,

may be the only way to rescue Iraq from the abyss. This solution is

increasingly called for by Iraqi journalists and political leaders and on

the street.

The invasion of Iraq in 2003 may indeed have been a war of choice. But

losing Iraq in 2011 is a choice that the United States and the rest of the

world cannot afford to make.

By Ayad Allawi

Ayad Allawi, a former prime minister ofIraq, leads the largest political

bloc in Iraq’s Parliament.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First it was rebels rounding up blacks, when in fact many of the rebels are blacks and they are rounding up mercenaries Gadhafi hired from Sub Sahara Africa to fight for him.

Then it was the imperialists greed for oil.

Now its Libya is another Iraq, when in fact nobody invaded Libya and no foreign government troops will occupy it, as was done in Iraq.

You can read some junk on the internet and then post part of it here to make a point but the only point you are making is you don't know what you are talking about,

especially in regards to what is happening in Libya today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

KELLY QUOTE Now its Libya is another Iraq, when in fact nobody invaded Libya and no foreign government troops will occupy it, as was done in Iraq. END KELLY QUOTE

WEll some ANGLO/AMERICAN special forces ARE (ARE) THERE, but........but....but....

ooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooo

Kelly thinks no boots on ground ++ HISTORY SAYS THIS PROBABLY WONT HAPPEN.

;)

oooooooo++++oooooooooooooo

Libya: NATO Acquires Military Outpost In Third Continent

*******************************************oooooooo************************++++

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Global Research, August 31, 2011

link http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=26327

Libya: Another country for NATO to take root in

Interview conducted John Robles on August 27 with Rick Rozoff, the manager of the Stop NATO website and a Correspondent of Global Research at www.globalresearch.ca

Can you shed a little light on the situation in Libya, in particular with NATO?

As you know, I’m in Chicago, not in Tripoli, so I’m observing events from afar. Yet there is an old Roman expression which says the game is best viewed by the spectator. So, what I have to say I think is trying to situate developments in Libya, whatever they are on the ground, within both a regional and an international context.

And, within that framework, we know that the African Union has refused recognition to the so-called Transitional National Council, consisting of what by all accounts is a fairly motley, heterogeneous grouping of anti-government forces in Libya, aided and abetted by major NATO powers like France, Britain, the U.S. and Italy and by Persian Gulf monarchies like Qatar and the United Arab Emirates.

So, the fact that the African continent, on which Libya is located, has collectively refused recognition to the new rebel regime is significant, as is the fact that the Russian Foreign Ministry has voiced its concerns and its opposition to any plans that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization may entertain for placing troops on the ground in Libya, ostensibly under the guise of a peacekeeping or stabilization force, but also more prominently voiced some concerns about the prospect of NATO military facilities being authorized by the forces opposed to Gaddafi.

Would you characterize everything that you have heard and seen as a true revolution of the people or is it some sort of a western-backed insurgency in your opinion?

The latter is acknowledged by universal accord, even by those celebrating the apparent overthrow of the government in Libya as a triumph of “people’s power” democracy or however they choose to phrase it. What is unquestionable is the fact that, whatever the nature of the rebel coalition is, it would never have succeeded in consolidating support outside of Libya, much less moving into the capital, if it had not been for over 21,000 NATO air missions since March 31 and almost 8,000 combat air sorties in the same period of time. Additionally, more and more information is emanating from sources in Europe, newspapers in Britain and elsewhere, that special operations troops, special forces, from several major NATO countries, including the CIA which is acting in the streets of Tripoli, are actively involved in combat operations on the ground.

Are they hunting Gaddafi or providing air support for the rebels?

There is no question about both. The intent of United Nations Resolution 1973 adopted in March to “use all means necessary to protect Libyan civilians” had been extended and in essence violated by France, Britain, Italy, the U.S., Canada and other major NATO nations to wage what can only be characterized as a war against the incumbent government in Libya, and this includes, according to NATO’s own statistics, over 21,000 air missions flown over Libya since March 31, of which almost 8,000 are combat sorties. And what is documented even in Western news sources, Western newspapers for example, is that as recently as today Muammar Gaddafi’s hometown has been attacked by NATO warplanes and earlier, a couple of days ago, the major governmental compound in Tripoli was attacked by as many as 64 missiles.

These attacks are coordinated with the military activities of rebel groupings, so that NATO basically bombs them into areas, including the capital and other cities in Libya. The coordination of NATO’s aerial bombing and naval blockade of Libya with rebel forces is unquestionably an act of participation on behalf of one of the belligerent forces against the other – the government of Libya. And in that sense it’s a perfect parallel to what happened in Yugoslavia in 1999, where NATO bombed the country mercilessly for 78 days in coordination and in conjunction with the so-called Kosovo Liberation Army.

You mentioned that some people from Global Research.ca are in Libya, in Tripoli, and they are trapped in a hotel there.

Actually, the international press corps is there. But there are particular concerns about Canadian-based journalist Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya of Global Research and French journalist Thierry Meyssan of the Voltaire Network, who have voiced concerns about their well-being. Their position is very well-known as not parroting the official line of the Western countries, and that information I’m sure has been passed on by establishment Western journalists within the hotel to rebel forces in Tripoli. And there is concern by the two journalists I’ve mentioned that their lives may be in danger.

What do you see as NATO’s role in Libya after Gaddafi is gone?

Time will tell. But assuming previous Yugoslav and Afghan precedents as a likely scenario, we have a lot to go on. We have the fact that the Turkish Foreign Minister announced yesterday that NATO’s role will continue in Libya after the installation of the rebel government, the so-called Transitional National Council.

And similar soundings have emanated from major figures and NATO countries that suggest, far from NATO’s role ending, it may in a certain sense just be beginning. And that parallels almost identically what happened in Yugoslavia in 1999 and what has happened in Afghanistan in the past decade, where NATO bombs itself into a country and sets up military bases and doesn’t leave. The U.S. still maintains Camp Bondsteel in the contested Serbian province of Kosovo, which is a large, expansive base, by some accounts the largest overseas military facility built by the US since the war in Vietnam. And it remains there over 12 years after the end of the 78-day bombing campaign against Yugoslavia.

Similarly, the U.S. has substantially upgraded air bases in Afghanistan, including those bordering Central Asian nations and close to the Iranian border, and there is no indication they are ever going to abandon them, as they are not going to abandon military bases in Iraq and other places. It’s a lot easier to bring NATO into one’s country or have it forced in than to get it out.

Rick Rozoff is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

Edited by Steven Gaal
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another lame report from someone who is in upper class American and admits he doesn't know that is going on in Libya.

Okay, now you want to talk about American bases in the Middle East?

Let's start with Wheelus AFB in Tripoli, now the international airport, taken over by Gadhafi in 1970.

Then there's the home of the US Fifth Fleet at Bahrain, which recently got a $500 million government

grant to double the size of their 60 acre base the USA took over from the British in the early 1970s.

This is the most strategic navy base in the Middle East and is responsible for all counter-pirate operations in the Indian Ocean

as well as backing up the Med Fleet and the SEA fleet when needed.

What are they going to do now that Bahrain is experiencing a revolution against the despotic dictator who the USA still supports because of its

strategic interests as the only US navy base in the entire region?

The role of NATO is almost over and as soon as the Alamo towns surrender, hopefully without more bloodshed, then NATO can move on to support the

freedom movements in other countries, though they probably won't go to Bahrain, the hypocrite bastards.

If the USA would support the rebels in Libya before the Al Qaeda do, then maybe the Libyans in Benghazi will okay a US Navy base

that could replace or act as a back up to the base in Bahrain that's on the ropes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another lame report from someone who is in upper class American and admits he doesn't know that is going on in Libya.

Okay, now you want to talk about American bases in the Middle East?

Let's start with Wheelus AFB in Tripoli, now the international airport, taken over by Gadhafi in 1970.

Then there's the home of the US Fifth Fleet at Bahrain, which recently got a $500 million government

grant to double the size of their 60 acre base the USA took over from the British in the early 1970s.

This is the most strategic navy base in the Middle East and is responsible for all counter-pirate operations in the Indian Ocean

as well as backing up the Med Fleet and the SEA fleet when needed.

What are they going to do now that Bahrain is experiencing a revolution against the despotic dictator who the USA still supports because of its

strategic interests as the only US navy base in the entire region?

The role of NATO is almost over and as soon as the Alamo towns surrender, hopefully without more bloodshed, then NATO can move on to support the

freedom movements in other countries, though they probably won't go to Bahrain, the hypocrite bastards.

If the USA would support the rebels in Libya before the Al Qaeda do, then maybe the Libyans in Benghazi will okay a US Navy base

that could replace or act as a back up to the base in Bahrain that's on the ropes.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXoooooooXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

++++

##############################################***

Bill you are too focused on Middle East/ NAVY.

Talking about Africa.Oil/resources not freedom, BLOOD for mineral wealth, 'ye old' "IMPERIALISM" by any other name.

'Freedom' word is to trick the non-thinkers..........

----------------------------ooo---------------

link http://newsflavor.com/world/africa/future-news-western-union-and-nato-forces-conquered-african-union/

link http://rickrozoff.wordpress.com/2011/05/20/africa-battleground-for-natos-21st-century-strategic-concept/

0000000000

In the words of Scheffer: “You see here the new NATO, the NATO that has the capacity to be expeditionary. In the 21st century you have to be prepared to project stability over long distances….” Associated Press at the time cited then-NATO Supreme Allied Commander Europe and commander of U.S. European Command Marine General James Jones (later the Obama administration’s first National Security Advisor) as envisioning the role of the NATO Response Force as one that “could entail naval patrols to protect tankers off the coast of West Africa or security for storage and production facilities in areas such as the oil-rich Niger Delta.” Immediately after assuming the dual commands in January 2003 Jones laid the groundwork for the permanent deployment of U.S. and NATO military assets in the oil-rich Gulf of Guinea off the continent’s western shores. [3]

---------------o-----------

key words above --- permanent deployment.......oil.....(no freedom) ;) THANKS Steven Gaal

Edited by Steven Gaal
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another lame report from someone who is in upper class American and admits he doesn't know that is going on in Libya.

Okay, now you want to talk about American bases in the Middle East?

Let's start with Wheelus AFB in Tripoli, now the international airport, taken over by Gadhafi in 1970.

Then there's the home of the US Fifth Fleet at Bahrain, which recently got a $500 million government

grant to double the size of their 60 acre base the USA took over from the British in the early 1970s.

This is the most strategic navy base in the Middle East and is responsible for all counter-pirate operations in the Indian Ocean

as well as backing up the Med Fleet and the SEA fleet when needed.

What are they going to do now that Bahrain is experiencing a revolution against the despotic dictator who the USA still supports because of its

strategic interests as the only US navy base in the entire region?

The role of NATO is almost over and as soon as the Alamo towns surrender, hopefully without more bloodshed, then NATO can move on to support the

freedom movements in other countries, though they probably won't go to Bahrain, the hypocrite bastards.

If the USA would support the rebels in Libya before the Al Qaeda do, then maybe the Libyans in Benghazi will okay a US Navy base

that could replace or act as a back up to the base in Bahrain that's on the ropes.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXoooooooXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

++++

##############################################***

Bill you are too focused on Middle East/ NAVY.

Talking about Africa.Oil/resources not freedom, BLOOD for mineral wealth, 'ye old' "IMPERIALISM" by any other name.

'Freedom' word is to trick the non-thinkers..........

----------------------------ooo---------------

link http://newsflavor.co...-african-union/

link http://rickrozoff.wo...ategic-concept/

0000000000

In the words of Scheffer: "You see here the new NATO, the NATO that has the capacity to be expeditionary. In the 21st century you have to be prepared to project stability over long distances…." Associated Press at the time cited then-NATO Supreme Allied Commander Europe and commander of U.S. European Command Marine General James Jones (later the Obama administration's first National Security Advisor) as envisioning the role of the NATO Response Force as one that "could entail naval patrols to protect tankers off the coast of West Africa or security for storage and production facilities in areas such as the oil-rich Niger Delta." Immediately after assuming the dual commands in January 2003 Jones laid the groundwork for the permanent deployment of U.S. and NATO military assets in the oil-rich Gulf of Guinea off the continent's western shores. [3]

---------------o-----------

key words above --- permanent deployment.......oil.....(no freedom) ;) THANKS Steven Gaal

Freedom isn't a trick word to fool non-thinkers, especially to those who haven't had any for 42 years and after fighting and many deaths over six months finally have it.

And I agree, NATO and its air force and special ops forces have shown that they can have an important impact without invading and occupying a country, and if they do it to protect oil - then they're doing it in our best interests, as our nation runs on oil, whether you like it or not.

And sure, they should used the same tactics against the pirates off Africa.

You're against imperialism, you're against oil, you're against NATO you're against intervention and you are for tyrants and despots who kill thousands of their own people who funnel their oil reserve money into their own family for private parties and pay rock stars $1 million to sing for their birthdays.

Not one NATO soldier died in combat in Libya so far - it's not over - and the mission is being achieved with little damage to the oil industry infrastructure, which Gadafhi, unlike Hussain in Kuait, left pretty much intact because he knew it was his lifeblood if he was to remain in power.

The only reason I respond to your posts is so people know that what you say is not true.

Revolutionaryprogram.blogspot.com

Edited by William Kelly
Link to comment
Share on other sites

War stops independent AFRICAN CURRENCY.

U.S. military intervention is always about material and political gain, and never about ideals.

oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo***

link http://www.finalcall.com/artman/publish/World_News_3/article_7886.shtml

Gold, Oil, Africa and Why the West Wants Gadhafi Dead

By Brian E. Muhammad -Contributing Writer- | Last updated: Jun 7, 2011 - 7:59:09 PM

Muammar Gadhafi's decision to pursue gold standard and reject dollars for oil payments may have sealed his fate

Colonel Muammar Gadhafi Photo: MGN Online

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Attacking Col. Gadhafi can be understood in the context ofAmerica and Europe fightingfor their survival, which anindependent Africa jeopardizes.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(FinalCall.com) - The war raging in Libya since February is getting progressively worse as NATO forces engage in regime change and worse, an objective to kill Muammar Gadhafi to eradicate his vision of a United Africa with a single currency backed by gold.

Observers say implementing that vision would change the world power equation and threaten Western hegemony. In response, the United States and its NATO partners have determined “Gadhafi must go,” and assumed the role of judge, jury and executioner.

“If they kill Brother Gadhafi, I submit to you that American interests in Africa will come under severe strain,” warned the Honorable Minister Louis Farrakhan on WPFW-FM's "Spectrum Today” program with Askia Muhammad.

“That man has invested in Africa more than any other leader in the recent history of Africa's coming into political independence,” he continued. The Muslim leader said America needs access to the mineral resources in Africa to be a viable power in the 21st century.

Minister Farrakhan further pointed out in the April 1 radio interview that the current plot to kill Col. Gadhafi comes at a time of great distress and decline for America. The fall of the dollar is a manifest loss of America's prestige and influence among the nations of the earth and an indicator of her end.

Graphic: MGN Online

“How's America's wealth today? How is she doing financially? What is the deficit? Some say it's about $56 trillion counting Social Security and Medicare. That's a big number. She's printing money, but there's nothing backing it,” said Min. Farrakhan.

In the book, “The Fall of America,” the Most Honorable Elijah Muhammad wrote, “One of the greatest powers of America washer dollar. The loss of such power will bring any nation to weakness, for this is the media of exchange between nations.”

“The English pound and the American dollar have been the power and beckoning light of these two great powers. But when the world went off the gold and silver standard, the financial doom of England and America was sealed,” he explained. Mr. Muhammad said further that “the Fall of America is now visible and understandable.

“Long has Allah (God) been gradually removing the power of the great and mighty America while few have noticed it. This has been done by degrees, and they do not perceive it.”

Mr. Muhammad warned America's fall serves as a sign of fate for her European counterparts.

Analysts say introducing the gold dinar as the new medium of exchange would destroy dependence on the U.S. dollar, the French franc and the British pound and threaten the Western world. It would “finally swing the global economic pendulum” that would break Western domination over Africa and other developing economies.

Attacking Col. Gadhafi can be understood in the context of America and Europe fighting for their survival, which an independent Africa jeopardizes.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

“Gadhafi's creation of the African Investment Bank in Sirte (Libya) and the African Monetary Fund to be based in Cameroon will supplant the IMF and undermine Western economic hegemony in Africa.”

—Gerald Pereira, an executive board member of the former Tripoli-based World Mathaba

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

“Gadhafi's creation of the African Investment Bank in Sirte (Libya) and the African Monetary Fund to be based in Cameroon will supplant the IMF and undermine Western economic hegemony in Africa,” said Gerald Pereira, an executive board member of the former Tripoli-based World Mathaba.

The moves are also bad for France because when the African Monetary Fund and the African Central Bank in Nigeria starts printing gold-backed currency, it would “ring the death knell" for the CFA franc through which Paris was able to maintain its neocolonial grip on 14 former African colonies for the last 50 years.

“It is easy to understand the French wrath against Gaddafi,” said Prof. Jean-Paul Pougala of the Geneva School of Diplomacy.

“The idea, according to Gaddafi, was that African and Muslim nations would join together to create this new currency and would use it to purchase oil and other resources in exclusion of the dollar and other currencies,” said political analyst Anthony Wile in an editorial for The Daily Bell online.

According to the International Monetary Fund, Libya's Central Bank is 100 percent state-owned and estimates that the bank has nearly 144 tons of gold in its vaults. If Col. Gadhafi changed the purchasing terms of his oil and other Libyan commodities sold on the world market and only accepted gold as payment; a policy like that wouldn't be welcomed by the power elites who control the world's central banks.

“That would certainly be something that would cause his immediate dismissal,” said Mr.Wile.

Furthermore, pricing oil in something other than the dollar would undercut the pedestal of U.S.. power in the world. Although in trouble, the dollar is the reserve currency based on a deal made with Saudi Arabia in 1971 in which the Saudis, as the world's largest oil producer, agreed to accept only dollars for oil, Mr. Wile observed.

The Libyan affair has sparked a divide in the world community with the African Union and nations like Venezuela, China and Cuba—and until recently Russia—on one side as voices of reason, caution and respect for international law and honoring the UN mandate which set the parameters for engagement in Libya.

On the other side are war hawkish America, France, Britain and Italy pursuing regime change and actively trying to assassinate Col. Gadhafi, though they deny that aim.

“Why all of a sudden, this rush to destroy Gadhafi?” asked Min. Farrakhan during his March 31 press conference on America's Middle East and Libya policy. “I know why you are angry with him; because he never agreed with your policies when it came to sucking the resources of Third World peoples, and putting in place dictators that would be amenable to America's policies.”

Other analysts concur that the control of Africa is front and center as the prize in the scramble to kill Col. Gadhafi and preserve Western domination on the world stage, making the African Union critical at this time.

The AU stood with Libya since NATO forces began their missile bombardment. The AU has also accused Western nations of marginalizing an African solution to an “African problem.”

The AU criticized NATO for bombing Tripoli, targeting Gadhafi family compounds and violating the stated UN mandate to uphold a no fly-zone and protect civilians.

AU negotiations to end the conflict were brokered by South African President Jacob Zuma, which the Libyan government accepted, but were discarded by the rebels who set preconditions—in conjunction with NATO—that demanded Col. Gadhafi's removal.

Graphic: MGN Online

The AU is the framework the Libyan leader was using to establish African self determination and economic self-sufficiency. Col. Gadhafi financed the restructuring of the former Organization of African Unity—formed by African leaders Dr. Kwame Nkrumah of Ghana, Sekou Toure of Guinea, Gamal Abdel Nasser of Egypt and others—into the AU and revived the concept of a United States of Africa with one continental army and a single currency backed by gold.

However critics of U.S. foreign policy objectives in Africa say efforts toward the continent becoming a unified bloc have been consistently weakened for fear that Africa will leverage more equity and control in the arena of global economics.

But the plan for an independent African currency backed by gold appears to be the real reason behind the frenzied attack on Col. Gadhafi.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

“The US, the other G-8 countries, the World Bank, IMF, BIS (Bank for International Settlements), and multinational corporations do not look kindly on leaders who threaten their dominance over world currency markets.”

—John Perkins, author of “Confessions of an Economic Hit Man"

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Whenever a government and leader arose that desired to use the resources of that nation for its people, America—through the CIA—would plan insurrections, coups, terrorist activities and even assassination of good leaders, observed Min. Farrakhan.

Despite the ire of Western foes, Muammar Gadhafi gained the clout to lead creation of a single currency because of strong oil profits versus a small population.

“The US, the other G-8 countries, the World Bank, IMF, BIS (Bank for International Settlements), and multinational corporations do not look kindly on leaders who threaten their dominance over world currency markets,” wrote John Perkins, author of “Confessions of an Economic Hit Man,” on Johnperkins.com. It is redolent of Saddam Hussein advocating similar policies shortly before the U.S. invaded Iraq, he said.

“Gadhafi knew how to play the West at their own game. He dared to wield real economic power in the name of Africa and anyone who dares to do so will feel the full wrath of Empire,” remarked. Perrier.

With the hopes of breaking Col. Gadhafi, foreign governments froze nearly $70 billion of Libyan assets belonging to the Libyan Investment Authority, the 13th largest international investment fund in the world. Although designed to hurt Col. Gadhafi, it injures Africa, because Libya assists with development projects throughout Africa.

An example of such projects was installing independent satellite communications across Africa, cutting off an expensive dependency on Europe for the same services. Col. Gadhafi infused $300 million into the project after the IMF, America and Europe broke repeated promises of finance.

In the 1990s forty-five African governments started RASCOM—Regional African Satellite Communication Organization—so Africa would have its own satellite and control communication costs on the continent.

Before RASCOM, costs for telephone calls to and from Africa were the highest worldwide and the continent was burdened with an annual $500 million fee paid to Europe for satellite usage. African satellites cost a onetime payment of $400 million and no annual fee—a move for self determination led by Col. Gadhafi that agitated Europe.

The rebels and collaborators

Since the beginning of the hostilities, the 69-year-old Gadhafi has consistently called for ceasefires and a political solution only to be rebuffed and have NATO missiles aimed at him and his family. However, with the stakes so high, what kind of Libya will emerge if Col. Gadhafi is killed?

“It will not be the rebels and the transitional council who will take power in Libya—it will be the imperialist powers who take over and the implications for Libya will be a complete re-colonization,” said Mr. Pereira.

Some nations officially recognized the NTC as the new legitimate government; however the NTC will face severe challenges as a government post Gadhafi. The NTC and other rebel groups lack cohesive unity, strengthening possibilities for ongoing civil strife.

Furthermore, the insurgency has become a nightmare wrought with hard financial and military questions. Xinhua News-English reported the group is cash poor and has difficulty raising money; while the only commodity available to them is oil, which still belongs the Gadhafi government and is embroiled in UN sanctions.

“I don't have any resources. Not a single dinar came in to the treasury,” lamented NTC oil and finance head Ali Tarhouni during a May 29 press conference. “We only exported one shipment (of oil) and got $150 million for that. So far we've spent $408 million on fuel. It's not a good number.”

The Benghazi-based rebels include remnants of the monarchy deposed by the 1969 Al-Fateh revolution. Several times over the years, the royalists attempted assassination of Col. Gadhafi and destabilization of the revolution, but lacked military ability and popular support.

On May 24, U.S. assistant secretary of state Jeffery Feltman announced the NTC will establish an office in Washington at the invitation of President Barrack Obama. Comparable arrangements exist with France and Britain.

For now, after several months of military intervention, betrayal by former comrades of the revolution and continued assassination attempts by NATO, Muammar Gadhafi is still standing. For the imperialists however, his elimination means the future of their power in Africa.

“Make no mistake, if NATO succeeds in Libya it will be a massive setback for the entire continent,” said Mr. Pereira.

Related news:

Libya's Official Jamahiriya News Channel on the Web (Ljbc.net)

Imperialist bombardment, assault on Libya continues (FCN, 05-19-2011)

Why the West Want the Fall of Muammar Gaddafi(Analysis by Jean-Paul Pougala, 04, 2011)

‘U.S. provoking China and Russia in Libya,Mediterranean'(Tehran Times, 04-28-2011)

West 'getting away with murder' in Libya(FCN, 04-27-2011)

Farrakhan Questioned on Libya(WPFWRadio Interview, 04-03-2011)

A CIA commander for the Libyan rebels(WSWS, 03-28-2011)

Libya, Getting it Right: A Revolutionary Pan-African Perspective(FCN, 03-08-2011)

Massive Disinformation War against Libya for US/West Military Intervention? [The 4th Media](03-01-2011)

British intelligence paid al-Qaeda cell to assassinate Col. Gadhafi, blocked Libya's Interpol arrest warrant of Bin Laden (11-10-2002)

TIME, 1986 - LIBYA: Real and Illusionary Events (TIME, 10-13-1986)

How the U.S. Government destabilized foreign governments(FCN, 07-22-1985)

How 6 million People Were killed in CIA secret wars(Info Clearing House)

Secret ties between CIA, drugs revealed(FCN, 1996)

********************oooooooo***************

#######################X##################

link http://failedempire.wordpress.com/2011/05/18/u-s-military-intervention-in-libya-aimed-to-squelch-gold-backed-african-dinar/

Failed Empire

Chronicling the collapse of a failed society

U.S. Military Intervention in Libya Aimed to Squelch Gold-Backed African Dinar

7 Comments Posted by Andrew B. on May 18, 2011

Wars are never actually fought for the reasons sold to the masses:

Some believe it is about protecting civilians, others say it is about oil, but some are convinced intervention in Libya is all about Gaddafi’s plan to introduce the gold dinar, a single African currency made from gold, a true sharing of the wealth.

Gaddafi did not give up. In the months leading up to the military intervention, he called on African and Muslim nations to join together to create this new currency that would rival the dollar and euro. They would sell oil and other resources around the world only for gold dinars.

It is an idea that would shift the economic balance of the world. …

And it has happened before.

In 2000, Saddam Hussein announced Iraqi oil would be traded in euros, not dollars. Some say sanctions and an invasion followed because the Americans were desperate to prevent OPEC from transferring oil trading in all its member countries to the euro.

A gold dinar would have had serious consequences for the world financial system, but may also have empowered the people of Africa, something black activists say the US wants to avoid at all costs.

Embroiled in wars of aggression throughout the Middle East, it’s hard to imagine that anyone would accept the standard rhetoric about protecting human rights and promoting democracy as motivation for our latest war in Libya. But judging by the absence of protest in the United States, and the sheer lack of meaningful coverage in the MSM, it would appear that most Americans have bought the fictional narrative.

The prospect of Gaddafi attempting to create an alternative, gold-backed currency would certainly have frightened Western powers, as the current system of profiteering is heavily based on the worthless dollar – a fiat currency. It seems entirely plausible that the true motivation for the invasion of Libya may well have been this fear of an independent African currency.

We cannot say with any degree of certainty that this was, in fact, the main motivation for the invasion. What we can say without question, however, is that the official line of promoting human rights and democracy is an absolute farce. War is a business venture, and it is not undertaken without specific lucrative goals in mind. Libya’s vast oil reserves undoubtedly played a role in the U.S. decision to invade, but oil in itself is unlikely to offer a strong enough incentive. If that were the case, after all, why haven’t we attacked Venezuela?

In order for a military intervention to take place, there must be a veritable witches’ brew of temptations, which make the potential fruits of aggression so great that the corporate warlords simply cannot resist. In Afghanistan we had the Trans-Afghanistan natural gas pipeline, the trillion-dollar mineral reserves, and the option of having a permanent U.S. presence is such a strategic geopolitical location. In Iraq we had the world’s second largest proven oil reserves and the opportunity to cement U.S. hegemony in the Middle East with the construction of military bases on the scale of small cities. And in Libya, of course, we have oil reserves, a strategic location and now, it seems, the grave necessity to crush a move towards African independence and the undermining of the dollar as a global benchmark currency.

Don’t buy the lies, folks. U.S. military intervention is always about material and political gain, and never about ideals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gadhafi isn't dead yet, and hopefully he will be brought to justice so his crimes can be brought out in the world court of public opinion.

If you want to assume a new African currency, you can, but you know that it isn't going anywhere.

If you want to believe that Gadhafi was opposed by his own people because they wanted the oil, or they want to support US policy

for foreign domination of minerals and political gain, you can, but I wouldn't suggest that you tell that to those rebel fighters

who fought in the revolution, as I suspect their motives were more personal.

On the contrary to this report, Libya now has the potential of being the real gateway for Africans to Europe and the West

and for Europe and the West to help and assist Africa, a continent strangled by dictators like Gadhafi as well as drought

and hunger.

You think Gadhafi was the answer to Africa's problems, yet he couldn't solve them in 42 years?

Give freedom a chance.

BK

War stops independent AFRICAN CURRENCY.

U.S. military intervention is always about material and political gain, and never about ideals.

oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo***

link http://www.finalcall...icle_7886.shtml

Gold, Oil, Africa and Why the West Wants Gadhafi Dead

By Brian E. Muhammad -Contributing Writer- | Last updated: Jun 7, 2011 - 7:59:09 PM

Muammar Gadhafi's decision to pursue gold standard and reject dollars for oil payments may have sealed his fate

Colonel Muammar Gadhafi Photo: MGN Online

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Attacking Col. Gadhafi can be understood in the context ofAmerica and Europe fightingfor their survival, which anindependent Africa jeopardizes.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(FinalCall.com) - The war raging in Libya since February is getting progressively worse as NATO forces engage in regime change and worse, an objective to kill Muammar Gadhafi to eradicate his vision of a United Africa with a single currency backed by gold.

Observers say implementing that vision would change the world power equation and threaten Western hegemony. In response, the United States and its NATO partners have determined "Gadhafi must go," and assumed the role of judge, jury and executioner.

"If they kill Brother Gadhafi, I submit to you that American interests in Africa will come under severe strain," warned the Honorable Minister Louis Farrakhan on WPFW-FM's "Spectrum Today" program with Askia Muhammad.

"That man has invested in Africa more than any other leader in the recent history of Africa's coming into political independence," he continued. The Muslim leader said America needs access to the mineral resources in Africa to be a viable power in the 21st century.

Minister Farrakhan further pointed out in the April 1 radio interview that the current plot to kill Col. Gadhafi comes at a time of great distress and decline for America. The fall of the dollar is a manifest loss of America's prestige and influence among the nations of the earth and an indicator of her end.

Graphic: MGN Online

"How's America's wealth today? How is she doing financially? What is the deficit? Some say it's about $56 trillion counting Social Security and Medicare. That's a big number. She's printing money, but there's nothing backing it," said Min. Farrakhan.

In the book, "The Fall of America," the Most Honorable Elijah Muhammad wrote, "One of the greatest powers of America washer dollar. The loss of such power will bring any nation to weakness, for this is the media of exchange between nations."

"The English pound and the American dollar have been the power and beckoning light of these two great powers. But when the world went off the gold and silver standard, the financial doom of England and America was sealed," he explained. Mr. Muhammad said further that "the Fall of America is now visible and understandable.

"Long has Allah (God) been gradually removing the power of the great and mighty America while few have noticed it. This has been done by degrees, and they do not perceive it."

Mr. Muhammad warned America's fall serves as a sign of fate for her European counterparts.

Analysts say introducing the gold dinar as the new medium of exchange would destroy dependence on the U.S. dollar, the French franc and the British pound and threaten the Western world. It would "finally swing the global economic pendulum" that would break Western domination over Africa and other developing economies.

Attacking Col. Gadhafi can be understood in the context of America and Europe fighting for their survival, which an independent Africa jeopardizes.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Gadhafi's creation of the African Investment Bank in Sirte (Libya) and the African Monetary Fund to be based in Cameroon will supplant the IMF and undermine Western economic hegemony in Africa."

—Gerald Pereira, an executive board member of the former Tripoli-based World Mathaba

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Gadhafi's creation of the African Investment Bank in Sirte (Libya) and the African Monetary Fund to be based in Cameroon will supplant the IMF and undermine Western economic hegemony in Africa," said Gerald Pereira, an executive board member of the former Tripoli-based World Mathaba.

The moves are also bad for France because when the African Monetary Fund and the African Central Bank in Nigeria starts printing gold-backed currency, it would "ring the death knell" for the CFA franc through which Paris was able to maintain its neocolonial grip on 14 former African colonies for the last 50 years.

"It is easy to understand the French wrath against Gaddafi," said Prof. Jean-Paul Pougala of the Geneva School of Diplomacy.

"The idea, according to Gaddafi, was that African and Muslim nations would join together to create this new currency and would use it to purchase oil and other resources in exclusion of the dollar and other currencies," said political analyst Anthony Wile in an editorial for The Daily Bell online.

According to the International Monetary Fund, Libya's Central Bank is 100 percent state-owned and estimates that the bank has nearly 144 tons of gold in its vaults. If Col. Gadhafi changed the purchasing terms of his oil and other Libyan commodities sold on the world market and only accepted gold as payment; a policy like that wouldn't be welcomed by the power elites who control the world's central banks.

"That would certainly be something that would cause his immediate dismissal," said Mr.Wile.

Furthermore, pricing oil in something other than the dollar would undercut the pedestal of U.S.. power in the world. Although in trouble, the dollar is the reserve currency based on a deal made with Saudi Arabia in 1971 in which the Saudis, as the world's largest oil producer, agreed to accept only dollars for oil, Mr. Wile observed.

The Libyan affair has sparked a divide in the world community with the African Union and nations like Venezuela, China and Cuba—and until recently Russia—on one side as voices of reason, caution and respect for international law and honoring the UN mandate which set the parameters for engagement in Libya.

On the other side are war hawkish America, France, Britain and Italy pursuing regime change and actively trying to assassinate Col. Gadhafi, though they deny that aim.

"Why all of a sudden, this rush to destroy Gadhafi?" asked Min. Farrakhan during his March 31 press conference on America's Middle East and Libya policy. "I know why you are angry with him; because he never agreed with your policies when it came to sucking the resources of Third World peoples, and putting in place dictators that would be amenable to America's policies."

Other analysts concur that the control of Africa is front and center as the prize in the scramble to kill Col. Gadhafi and preserve Western domination on the world stage, making the African Union critical at this time.

The AU stood with Libya since NATO forces began their missile bombardment. The AU has also accused Western nations of marginalizing an African solution to an "African problem."

The AU criticized NATO for bombing Tripoli, targeting Gadhafi family compounds and violating the stated UN mandate to uphold a no fly-zone and protect civilians.

AU negotiations to end the conflict were brokered by South African President Jacob Zuma, which the Libyan government accepted, but were discarded by the rebels who set preconditions—in conjunction with NATO—that demanded Col. Gadhafi's removal.

Graphic: MGN Online

The AU is the framework the Libyan leader was using to establish African self determination and economic self-sufficiency. Col. Gadhafi financed the restructuring of the former Organization of African Unity—formed by African leaders Dr. Kwame Nkrumah of Ghana, Sekou Toure of Guinea, Gamal Abdel Nasser of Egypt and others—into the AU and revived the concept of a United States of Africa with one continental army and a single currency backed by gold.

However critics of U.S. foreign policy objectives in Africa say efforts toward the continent becoming a unified bloc have been consistently weakened for fear that Africa will leverage more equity and control in the arena of global economics.

But the plan for an independent African currency backed by gold appears to be the real reason behind the frenzied attack on Col. Gadhafi.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"The US, the other G-8 countries, the World Bank, IMF, BIS (Bank for International Settlements), and multinational corporations do not look kindly on leaders who threaten their dominance over world currency markets."

—John Perkins, author of "Confessions of an Economic Hit Man"

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Whenever a government and leader arose that desired to use the resources of that nation for its people, America—through the CIA—would plan insurrections, coups, terrorist activities and even assassination of good leaders, observed Min. Farrakhan.

Despite the ire of Western foes, Muammar Gadhafi gained the clout to lead creation of a single currency because of strong oil profits versus a small population.

"The US, the other G-8 countries, the World Bank, IMF, BIS (Bank for International Settlements), and multinational corporations do not look kindly on leaders who threaten their dominance over world currency markets," wrote John Perkins, author of "Confessions of an Economic Hit Man," on Johnperkins.com. It is redolent of Saddam Hussein advocating similar policies shortly before the U.S. invaded Iraq, he said.

"Gadhafi knew how to play the West at their own game. He dared to wield real economic power in the name of Africa and anyone who dares to do so will feel the full wrath of Empire," remarked. Perrier.

With the hopes of breaking Col. Gadhafi, foreign governments froze nearly $70 billion of Libyan assets belonging to the Libyan Investment Authority, the 13th largest international investment fund in the world. Although designed to hurt Col. Gadhafi, it injures Africa, because Libya assists with development projects throughout Africa.

An example of such projects was installing independent satellite communications across Africa, cutting off an expensive dependency on Europe for the same services. Col. Gadhafi infused $300 million into the project after the IMF, America and Europe broke repeated promises of finance.

In the 1990s forty-five African governments started RASCOM—Regional African Satellite Communication Organization—so Africa would have its own satellite and control communication costs on the continent.

Before RASCOM, costs for telephone calls to and from Africa were the highest worldwide and the continent was burdened with an annual $500 million fee paid to Europe for satellite usage. African satellites cost a onetime payment of $400 million and no annual fee—a move for self determination led by Col. Gadhafi that agitated Europe.

The rebels and collaborators

Since the beginning of the hostilities, the 69-year-old Gadhafi has consistently called for ceasefires and a political solution only to be rebuffed and have NATO missiles aimed at him and his family. However, with the stakes so high, what kind of Libya will emerge if Col. Gadhafi is killed?

"It will not be the rebels and the transitional council who will take power in Libya—it will be the imperialist powers who take over and the implications for Libya will be a complete re-colonization," said Mr. Pereira.

Some nations officially recognized the NTC as the new legitimate government; however the NTC will face severe challenges as a government post Gadhafi. The NTC and other rebel groups lack cohesive unity, strengthening possibilities for ongoing civil strife.

Furthermore, the insurgency has become a nightmare wrought with hard financial and military questions. Xinhua News-English reported the group is cash poor and has difficulty raising money; while the only commodity available to them is oil, which still belongs the Gadhafi government and is embroiled in UN sanctions.

"I don't have any resources. Not a single dinar came in to the treasury," lamented NTC oil and finance head Ali Tarhouni during a May 29 press conference. "We only exported one shipment (of oil) and got $150 million for that. So far we've spent $408 million on fuel. It's not a good number."

The Benghazi-based rebels include remnants of the monarchy deposed by the 1969 Al-Fateh revolution. Several times over the years, the royalists attempted assassination of Col. Gadhafi and destabilization of the revolution, but lacked military ability and popular support.

On May 24, U.S. assistant secretary of state Jeffery Feltman announced the NTC will establish an office in Washington at the invitation of President Barrack Obama. Comparable arrangements exist with France and Britain.

For now, after several months of military intervention, betrayal by former comrades of the revolution and continued assassination attempts by NATO, Muammar Gadhafi is still standing. For the imperialists however, his elimination means the future of their power in Africa.

"Make no mistake, if NATO succeeds in Libya it will be a massive setback for the entire continent," said Mr. Pereira.

Related news:

Libya's Official Jamahiriya News Channel on the Web (Ljbc.net)

Imperialist bombardment, assault on Libya continues (FCN, 05-19-2011)

Why the West Want the Fall of Muammar Gaddafi(Analysis by Jean-Paul Pougala, 04, 2011)

'U.S. provoking China and Russia in Libya,Mediterranean'(Tehran Times, 04-28-2011)

West 'getting away with murder' in Libya(FCN, 04-27-2011)

Farrakhan Questioned on Libya(WPFWRadio Interview, 04-03-2011)

A CIA commander for the Libyan rebels(WSWS, 03-28-2011)

Libya, Getting it Right: A Revolutionary Pan-African Perspective(FCN, 03-08-2011)

Massive Disinformation War against Libya for US/West Military Intervention? [The 4th Media](03-01-2011)

British intelligence paid al-Qaeda cell to assassinate Col. Gadhafi, blocked Libya's Interpol arrest warrant of Bin Laden (11-10-2002)

TIME, 1986 - LIBYA: Real and Illusionary Events (TIME, 10-13-1986)

How the U.S. Government destabilized foreign governments(FCN, 07-22-1985)

How 6 million People Were killed in CIA secret wars(Info Clearing House)

Secret ties between CIA, drugs revealed(FCN, 1996)

********************oooooooo***************

#######################X##################

link http://failedempire....-african-dinar/

Failed Empire

Chronicling the collapse of a failed society

U.S. Military Intervention in Libya Aimed to Squelch Gold-Backed African Dinar

7 Comments Posted by Andrew B. on May 18, 2011

Wars are never actually fought for the reasons sold to the masses:

Some believe it is about protecting civilians, others say it is about oil, but some are convinced intervention in Libya is all about Gaddafi's plan to introduce the gold dinar, a single African currency made from gold, a true sharing of the wealth.

Gaddafi did not give up. In the months leading up to the military intervention, he called on African and Muslim nations to join together to create this new currency that would rival the dollar and euro. They would sell oil and other resources around the world only for gold dinars.

It is an idea that would shift the economic balance of the world. …

And it has happened before.

In 2000, Saddam Hussein announced Iraqi oil would be traded in euros, not dollars. Some say sanctions and an invasion followed because the Americans were desperate to prevent OPEC from transferring oil trading in all its member countries to the euro.

A gold dinar would have had serious consequences for the world financial system, but may also have empowered the people of Africa, something black activists say the US wants to avoid at all costs.

Embroiled in wars of aggression throughout the Middle East, it's hard to imagine that anyone would accept the standard rhetoric about protecting human rights and promoting democracy as motivation for our latest war in Libya. But judging by the absence of protest in the United States, and the sheer lack of meaningful coverage in the MSM, it would appear that most Americans have bought the fictional narrative.

The prospect of Gaddafi attempting to create an alternative, gold-backed currency would certainly have frightened Western powers, as the current system of profiteering is heavily based on the worthless dollar – a fiat currency. It seems entirely plausible that the true motivation for the invasion of Libya may well have been this fear of an independent African currency.

We cannot say with any degree of certainty that this was, in fact, the main motivation for the invasion. What we can say without question, however, is that the official line of promoting human rights and democracy is an absolute farce. War is a business venture, and it is not undertaken without specific lucrative goals in mind. Libya's vast oil reserves undoubtedly played a role in the U.S. decision to invade, but oil in itself is unlikely to offer a strong enough incentive. If that were the case, after all, why haven't we attacked Venezuela?

In order for a military intervention to take place, there must be a veritable witches' brew of temptations, which make the potential fruits of aggression so great that the corporate warlords simply cannot resist. In Afghanistan we had the Trans-Afghanistan natural gas pipeline, the trillion-dollar mineral reserves, and the option of having a permanent U.S. presence is such a strategic geopolitical location. In Iraq we had the world's second largest proven oil reserves and the opportunity to cement U.S. hegemony in the Middle East with the construction of military bases on the scale of small cities. And in Libya, of course, we have oil reserves, a strategic location and now, it seems, the grave necessity to crush a move towards African independence and the undermining of the dollar as a global benchmark currency.

Don't buy the lies, folks. U.S. military intervention is always about material and political gain, and never about ideals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gadhafi isn't dead yet, and hopefully he will be brought to justice so his crimes can be brought out in the world court of public opinion.

If you want to assume a new African currency, you can, but you know that it isn't going anywhere.

If you want to believe that Gadhafi was opposed by his own people because they wanted the oil, or they want to support US policy

for foreign domination of minerals and political gain, you can, but I wouldn't suggest that you tell that to those rebel fighters

who fought in the revolution, as I suspect their motives were more personal.

On the contrary to this report, Libya now has the potential of being the real gateway for Africans to Europe and

for Europe and the West to help and assist Africa, a continent strangled by dictators like Gadhafi as well as drought

and hunger.

You think Gadhafi was the answer to Africa's problems, yet he couldn't solve them in 42 years?

Give freedom a chance.

BK

War stops independent AFRICAN CURRENCY.

U.S. military intervention is always about material and political gain, and never about ideals.

oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo***

link http://www.finalcall...icle_7886.shtml

Gold, Oil, Africa and Why the West Wants Gadhafi Dead

By Brian E. Muhammad -Contributing Writer- | Last updated: Jun 7, 2011 - 7:59:09 PM

Muammar Gadhafi's decision to pursue gold standard and reject dollars for oil payments may have sealed his fate

Colonel Muammar Gadhafi Photo: MGN Online

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Attacking Col. Gadhafi can be understood in the context ofAmerica and Europe fightingfor their survival, which anindependent Africa jeopardizes.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(FinalCall.com) - The war raging in Libya since February is getting progressively worse as NATO forces engage in regime change and worse, an objective to kill Muammar Gadhafi to eradicate his vision of a United Africa with a single currency backed by gold.

Observers say implementing that vision would change the world power equation and threaten Western hegemony. In response, the United States and its NATO partners have determined "Gadhafi must go," and assumed the role of judge, jury and executioner.

"If they kill Brother Gadhafi, I submit to you that American interests in Africa will come under severe strain," warned the Honorable Minister Louis Farrakhan on WPFW-FM's "Spectrum Today" program with Askia Muhammad.

"That man has invested in Africa more than any other leader in the recent history of Africa's coming into political independence," he continued. The Muslim leader said America needs access to the mineral resources in Africa to be a viable power in the 21st century.

Minister Farrakhan further pointed out in the April 1 radio interview that the current plot to kill Col. Gadhafi comes at a time of great distress and decline for America. The fall of the dollar is a manifest loss of America's prestige and influence among the nations of the earth and an indicator of her end.

Graphic: MGN Online

"How's America's wealth today? How is she doing financially? What is the deficit? Some say it's about $56 trillion counting Social Security and Medicare. That's a big number. She's printing money, but there's nothing backing it," said Min. Farrakhan.

In the book, "The Fall of America," the Most Honorable Elijah Muhammad wrote, "One of the greatest powers of America washer dollar. The loss of such power will bring any nation to weakness, for this is the media of exchange between nations."

"The English pound and the American dollar have been the power and beckoning light of these two great powers. But when the world went off the gold and silver standard, the financial doom of England and America was sealed," he explained. Mr. Muhammad said further that "the Fall of America is now visible and understandable.

"Long has Allah (God) been gradually removing the power of the great and mighty America while few have noticed it. This has been done by degrees, and they do not perceive it."

Mr. Muhammad warned America's fall serves as a sign of fate for her European counterparts.

Analysts say introducing the gold dinar as the new medium of exchange would destroy dependence on the U.S. dollar, the French franc and the British pound and threaten the Western world. It would "finally swing the global economic pendulum" that would break Western domination over Africa and other developing economies.

Attacking Col. Gadhafi can be understood in the context of America and Europe fighting for their survival, which an independent Africa jeopardizes.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Gadhafi's creation of the African Investment Bank in Sirte (Libya) and the African Monetary Fund to be based in Cameroon will supplant the IMF and undermine Western economic hegemony in Africa."

—Gerald Pereira, an executive board member of the former Tripoli-based World Mathaba

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Gadhafi's creation of the African Investment Bank in Sirte (Libya) and the African Monetary Fund to be based in Cameroon will supplant the IMF and undermine Western economic hegemony in Africa," said Gerald Pereira, an executive board member of the former Tripoli-based World Mathaba.

The moves are also bad for France because when the African Monetary Fund and the African Central Bank in Nigeria starts printing gold-backed currency, it would "ring the death knell" for the CFA franc through which Paris was able to maintain its neocolonial grip on 14 former African colonies for the last 50 years.

"It is easy to understand the French wrath against Gaddafi," said Prof. Jean-Paul Pougala of the Geneva School of Diplomacy.

"The idea, according to Gaddafi, was that African and Muslim nations would join together to create this new currency and would use it to purchase oil and other resources in exclusion of the dollar and other currencies," said political analyst Anthony Wile in an editorial for The Daily Bell online.

According to the International Monetary Fund, Libya's Central Bank is 100 percent state-owned and estimates that the bank has nearly 144 tons of gold in its vaults. If Col. Gadhafi changed the purchasing terms of his oil and other Libyan commodities sold on the world market and only accepted gold as payment; a policy like that wouldn't be welcomed by the power elites who control the world's central banks.

"That would certainly be something that would cause his immediate dismissal," said Mr.Wile.

Furthermore, pricing oil in something other than the dollar would undercut the pedestal of U.S.. power in the world. Although in trouble, the dollar is the reserve currency based on a deal made with Saudi Arabia in 1971 in which the Saudis, as the world's largest oil producer, agreed to accept only dollars for oil, Mr. Wile observed.

The Libyan affair has sparked a divide in the world community with the African Union and nations like Venezuela, China and Cuba—and until recently Russia—on one side as voices of reason, caution and respect for international law and honoring the UN mandate which set the parameters for engagement in Libya.

On the other side are war hawkish America, France, Britain and Italy pursuing regime change and actively trying to assassinate Col. Gadhafi, though they deny that aim.

"Why all of a sudden, this rush to destroy Gadhafi?" asked Min. Farrakhan during his March 31 press conference on America's Middle East and Libya policy. "I know why you are angry with him; because he never agreed with your policies when it came to sucking the resources of Third World peoples, and putting in place dictators that would be amenable to America's policies."

Other analysts concur that the control of Africa is front and center as the prize in the scramble to kill Col. Gadhafi and preserve Western domination on the world stage, making the African Union critical at this time.

The AU stood with Libya since NATO forces began their missile bombardment. The AU has also accused Western nations of marginalizing an African solution to an "African problem."

The AU criticized NATO for bombing Tripoli, targeting Gadhafi family compounds and violating the stated UN mandate to uphold a no fly-zone and protect civilians.

AU negotiations to end the conflict were brokered by South African President Jacob Zuma, which the Libyan government accepted, but were discarded by the rebels who set preconditions—in conjunction with NATO—that demanded Col. Gadhafi's removal.

Graphic: MGN Online

The AU is the framework the Libyan leader was using to establish African self determination and economic self-sufficiency. Col. Gadhafi financed the restructuring of the former Organization of African Unity—formed by African leaders Dr. Kwame Nkrumah of Ghana, Sekou Toure of Guinea, Gamal Abdel Nasser of Egypt and others—into the AU and revived the concept of a United States of Africa with one continental army and a single currency backed by gold.

However critics of U.S. foreign policy objectives in Africa say efforts toward the continent becoming a unified bloc have been consistently weakened for fear that Africa will leverage more equity and control in the arena of global economics.

But the plan for an independent African currency backed by gold appears to be the real reason behind the frenzied attack on Col. Gadhafi.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"The US, the other G-8 countries, the World Bank, IMF, BIS (Bank for International Settlements), and multinational corporations do not look kindly on leaders who threaten their dominance over world currency markets."

—John Perkins, author of "Confessions of an Economic Hit Man"

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Whenever a government and leader arose that desired to use the resources of that nation for its people, America—through the CIA—would plan insurrections, coups, terrorist activities and even assassination of good leaders, observed Min. Farrakhan.

Despite the ire of Western foes, Muammar Gadhafi gained the clout to lead creation of a single currency because of strong oil profits versus a small population.

"The US, the other G-8 countries, the World Bank, IMF, BIS (Bank for International Settlements), and multinational corporations do not look kindly on leaders who threaten their dominance over world currency markets," wrote John Perkins, author of "Confessions of an Economic Hit Man," on Johnperkins.com. It is redolent of Saddam Hussein advocating similar policies shortly before the U.S. invaded Iraq, he said.

"Gadhafi knew how to play the West at their own game. He dared to wield real economic power in the name of Africa and anyone who dares to do so will feel the full wrath of Empire," remarked. Perrier.

With the hopes of breaking Col. Gadhafi, foreign governments froze nearly $70 billion of Libyan assets belonging to the Libyan Investment Authority, the 13th largest international investment fund in the world. Although designed to hurt Col. Gadhafi, it injures Africa, because Libya assists with development projects throughout Africa.

An example of such projects was installing independent satellite communications across Africa, cutting off an expensive dependency on Europe for the same services. Col. Gadhafi infused $300 million into the project after the IMF, America and Europe broke repeated promises of finance.

In the 1990s forty-five African governments started RASCOM—Regional African Satellite Communication Organization—so Africa would have its own satellite and control communication costs on the continent.

Before RASCOM, costs for telephone calls to and from Africa were the highest worldwide and the continent was burdened with an annual $500 million fee paid to Europe for satellite usage. African satellites cost a onetime payment of $400 million and no annual fee—a move for self determination led by Col. Gadhafi that agitated Europe.

The rebels and collaborators

Since the beginning of the hostilities, the 69-year-old Gadhafi has consistently called for ceasefires and a political solution only to be rebuffed and have NATO missiles aimed at him and his family. However, with the stakes so high, what kind of Libya will emerge if Col. Gadhafi is killed?

"It will not be the rebels and the transitional council who will take power in Libya—it will be the imperialist powers who take over and the implications for Libya will be a complete re-colonization," said Mr. Pereira.

Some nations officially recognized the NTC as the new legitimate government; however the NTC will face severe challenges as a government post Gadhafi. The NTC and other rebel groups lack cohesive unity, strengthening possibilities for ongoing civil strife.

Furthermore, the insurgency has become a nightmare wrought with hard financial and military questions. Xinhua News-English reported the group is cash poor and has difficulty raising money; while the only commodity available to them is oil, which still belongs the Gadhafi government and is embroiled in UN sanctions.

"I don't have any resources. Not a single dinar came in to the treasury," lamented NTC oil and finance head Ali Tarhouni during a May 29 press conference. "We only exported one shipment (of oil) and got $150 million for that. So far we've spent $408 million on fuel. It's not a good number."

The Benghazi-based rebels include remnants of the monarchy deposed by the 1969 Al-Fateh revolution. Several times over the years, the royalists attempted assassination of Col. Gadhafi and destabilization of the revolution, but lacked military ability and popular support.

On May 24, U.S. assistant secretary of state Jeffery Feltman announced the NTC will establish an office in Washington at the invitation of President Barrack Obama. Comparable arrangements exist with France and Britain.

For now, after several months of military intervention, betrayal by former comrades of the revolution and continued assassination attempts by NATO, Muammar Gadhafi is still standing. For the imperialists however, his elimination means the future of their power in Africa.

"Make no mistake, if NATO succeeds in Libya it will be a massive setback for the entire continent," said Mr. Pereira.

Related news:

Libya's Official Jamahiriya News Channel on the Web (Ljbc.net)

Imperialist bombardment, assault on Libya continues (FCN, 05-19-2011)

Why the West Want the Fall of Muammar Gaddafi(Analysis by Jean-Paul Pougala, 04, 2011)

'U.S. provoking China and Russia in Libya,Mediterranean'(Tehran Times, 04-28-2011)

West 'getting away with murder' in Libya(FCN, 04-27-2011)

Farrakhan Questioned on Libya(WPFWRadio Interview, 04-03-2011)

A CIA commander for the Libyan rebels(WSWS, 03-28-2011)

Libya, Getting it Right: A Revolutionary Pan-African Perspective(FCN, 03-08-2011)

Massive Disinformation War against Libya for US/West Military Intervention? [The 4th Media](03-01-2011)

British intelligence paid al-Qaeda cell to assassinate Col. Gadhafi, blocked Libya's Interpol arrest warrant of Bin Laden (11-10-2002)

TIME, 1986 - LIBYA: Real and Illusionary Events (TIME, 10-13-1986)

How the U.S. Government destabilized foreign governments(FCN, 07-22-1985)

How 6 million People Were killed in CIA secret wars(Info Clearing House)

Secret ties between CIA, drugs revealed(FCN, 1996)

********************oooooooo***************

#######################X##################

link http://failedempire....-african-dinar/

Failed Empire

Chronicling the collapse of a failed society

U.S. Military Intervention in Libya Aimed to Squelch Gold-Backed African Dinar

7 Comments Posted by Andrew B. on May 18, 2011

Wars are never actually fought for the reasons sold to the masses:

Some believe it is about protecting civilians, others say it is about oil, but some are convinced intervention in Libya is all about Gaddafi's plan to introduce the gold dinar, a single African currency made from gold, a true sharing of the wealth.

Gaddafi did not give up. In the months leading up to the military intervention, he called on African and Muslim nations to join together to create this new currency that would rival the dollar and euro. They would sell oil and other resources around the world only for gold dinars.

It is an idea that would shift the economic balance of the world. …

And it has happened before.

In 2000, Saddam Hussein announced Iraqi oil would be traded in euros, not dollars. Some say sanctions and an invasion followed because the Americans were desperate to prevent OPEC from transferring oil trading in all its member countries to the euro.

A gold dinar would have had serious consequences for the world financial system, but may also have empowered the people of Africa, something black activists say the US wants to avoid at all costs.

Embroiled in wars of aggression throughout the Middle East, it's hard to imagine that anyone would accept the standard rhetoric about protecting human rights and promoting democracy as motivation for our latest war in Libya. But judging by the absence of protest in the United States, and the sheer lack of meaningful coverage in the MSM, it would appear that most Americans have bought the fictional narrative.

The prospect of Gaddafi attempting to create an alternative, gold-backed currency would certainly have frightened Western powers, as the current system of profiteering is heavily based on the worthless dollar – a fiat currency. It seems entirely plausible that the true motivation for the invasion of Libya may well have been this fear of an independent African currency.

We cannot say with any degree of certainty that this was, in fact, the main motivation for the invasion. What we can say without question, however, is that the official line of promoting human rights and democracy is an absolute farce. War is a business venture, and it is not undertaken without specific lucrative goals in mind. Libya's vast oil reserves undoubtedly played a role in the U.S. decision to invade, but oil in itself is unlikely to offer a strong enough incentive. If that were the case, after all, why haven't we attacked Venezuela?

In order for a military intervention to take place, there must be a veritable witches' brew of temptations, which make the potential fruits of aggression so great that the corporate warlords simply cannot resist. In Afghanistan we had the Trans-Afghanistan natural gas pipeline, the trillion-dollar mineral reserves, and the option of having a permanent U.S. presence is such a strategic geopolitical location. In Iraq we had the world's second largest proven oil reserves and the opportunity to cement U.S. hegemony in the Middle East with the construction of military bases on the scale of small cities. And in Libya, of course, we have oil reserves, a strategic location and now, it seems, the grave necessity to crush a move towards African independence and the undermining of the dollar as a global benchmark currency.

Don't buy the lies, folks. U.S. military intervention is always about material and political gain, and never about ideals.

Edited by William Kelly
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Libya: "The Price of Freedom"

Highest Standard of Living in Africa

by Joachim Guilliard

April 27,2011

ink http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=24518

Translation from German by John Catalinotto

Original article: Libyen – Überlegungen zum drohenden „Preis der Freiheit"

Libya has the highest living standard in Africa. The "United Nations Development Program (UNDP) confirms that the country has excellent prospects for achieving United Nations development goals by 2015. NATO's war will have already dashed those hopes. A collapse like the one in Iraq now threatens the country.

There has been little reaching the European public in the past few years about Libya, whose relationship with the West had normalized. European leaders met with their Libyan counterpart Muammar al-Gadhafi often and business flourished. In the course of preparation for war, the country was suddenly transformed into the most evil dictatorship. Even many war opponents accepted this characterization as their own and now want to overthrow the "tyrant."

But if Libyan society can really be reduced to the "revolutionary leader" Gadhafi in Libya, is the situation really worse than in a hundred other countries and are there not many more factors that determine the living conditions of a country, besides Western-style "freedoms"?

For Richard Falk, the UN special rapporteur for human rights in Palestine, the "degree of repression" in Libya is not "more pervasive and severe" than in other authoritarian countries. Even according to Amnesty International's country reports of human rights conditions, that of Libya differs little from many other countries; regarding the Arab allies in the NATO war alliance, such as Saudi Arabia, it is even much worse.

The UN Human Rights Council has praised the country in its latest report on the "universal periodic review" of Libya, which was made late last year, even for its progress on human rights. Many countries -- including Venezuela and Cuba, but also Australia and Canada -- raised in their statements some aspects that still deserve special mention. (See also UN Praised Libya's Human Rights Record, Mathaba, April 8, 2011)

For the Western media, this report, whose final debate has now been shifted abruptly from March to June, is a scandal (for them it’s the result of there being many "less civilized" members of the Human Rights Council, those from the world’s South). But what these countries did was to view living conditions from a different perspective, one that places a strong emphasis on the realization of social rights, i.e., the satisfaction of basic needs, including adequate income, food, housing, health care and education.

Also in this regard the situation in Libya is, from the point of view of corruption and high youth unemployment, thoroughly unsatisfactory. Compared with other countries, however, the Libyans are still in good shape and have a lot to lose from the NATO intervention. Although the media often refers to youth unemployment of 15 to 30 percent, it does not mention that in Libya, in contrast to other countries, all have their subsistence guaranteed.

The relatively high standard of living also explains why Gadhafi definitely still has support in the country -- particularly, according to Libya expert Andreas Dittmann, among the older generations, who remember the old days.

"In Libya, there may be millions who dislike Gaddafi but like much of what he accomplished," according to the famous Norwegian peace researcher Johan Galtung (The West's War Against Gadhafi - Yet another long-lasting, tragic crime against humanity, IPS, Global Research , April 6, 2011)

Sanctions and low oil prices slowed development

When in 1969 the U.S. and the British-backed King Idris was overthrown, Libya was still a poor, undeveloped country weighed down by its colonial past despite ongoing oil exports that began in 1961. The gradual nationalization of oil production allowed for accelerated economic development and rapid improvements in living conditions.

With the sharp fall in oil prices 1985-2001, this development came to a standstill. The 1993 UN-imposed sanctions enormously aggravated Libya’s economic difficulties. The gross domestic product (GDP) per capita declined from $6,600 in 1990 to $3,600 in 2002 (World Bank, World Development Indicators) and has grown only after the lifting of UN sanctions in September 2003. (The United States lifted its unilateral sanctions in stages from 2004 until June 2006.)

In 2008, the GDP per capita, expressed in purchasing power, according to UNDP Database, reached $16,200 U.S. (For comparison, the GDP of Egypt was in the same year $5,900, that of Algeria and Tunisia $8,000. Saudi Arabia had a GDP of about $24,000, Kuwait and Qatar of $72,000 and $51,500 dollars respectively.)

The economic sanctions blocked the modernization of Libya’s infrastructure and in especially brought all development plans, besides in the petroleum industry also in others, to a virtual standstill. (Jean-Pierre Sereni, The subtleties of Libyan crude, Le Monde diplomatique, April 8, 2011, free version at Counterpunch)

The economic decline accordingly slowed the development also in social sectors. In the measure of its "Human Development Index" (HDI), which investigates the root values of some basic indicators such as life expectancy, infant mortality and literacy development to evaluate the living standard of a country, Libya also slumped in the mid-1990s from 67th to 73rd place.

High standard of living achieved

After government revenue, supported by rising oil prices, richly flowed once more, living conditions have clearly improved. The country now ranks 53rd on the HDI index, better than all other African countries and also better than the richer and Western-backed Saudi Arabia. Using "Government subsidies in health, agriculture and food imports," along with "a simultaneous increase in household income," could "extreme poverty" be virtually eliminated, stated the UNDP in its monitor of the millennium development goals of the UN. (Millennium Development Goals: Goal 1 - Goal 8, UNDP Libya Office)

The life expectancy rose to 74.5 years and is now the highest in Africa. It is now almost one and a half years higher than in Saudi Arabia, which was the reverse of the situation in 1980 (UNDP Database) The infant mortality rate declined to 17 deaths per 1,000 births and is not nearly as high as in Algeria (41) and also lower than in Saudi Arabia (21). (WHO, Global Health Indicators 2010) Libya is also ahead in the care of pregnant women and the reduction of maternal mortality. Malaria was eradicated completely.

According to the UNDP, a lack of human resources in health care still presents a problem, but "the gradual reintegration of the country into the international economy after the lifting of sanctions" is leading "to better availability of health care. The government provides all citizens with free health care and achieved high coverage in the most basic health areas."

The illiteracy rate dropped to 11.6 percent in Libya, and is well below that of Egypt (33.6 percent), Algeria (27.4 percent), Tunisia (22 percent) and Saudi Arabia (14.5 percent). (See Human Development Report 2010)

The UNDP-calculated Education Index, which in addition to literacy also includes the number of pupils in secondary schools and university students, is even higher than that of small super-rich emirates Kuwait and Qatar, which can hardly be compared with the Arab territorial states. (See UNDP, Arab Human Development Report 2009 and UNDP, Human Development Report 2009)

The UNDP certified that Libya has also made "a significant progress in gender equality," particularly in the fields of education and health, while there is still much to do regarding representation in politics and the economy. With a relative low "index of gender inequality" the UNDP places the country in the Human Development Report 2010 concerning gender equality at rank 52 and thus also well ahead of Egypt (ranked 108), Algeria (70), Tunisia (56), Saudi Arabia (ranked 128) and Qatar (94). Even Argentina (ranked 60) seems worse in this regard.

In view of these achievements, the positive Human Rights assessment of developments in Libya should hardly be a surprise.

The example of Iraq

In 1980, Iraq also had a relatively high living standard, even higher than that of Libya. This collapsed massively under the murderous UN embargo [1990-2003]. Their "liberation" from Saddam Hussein then toppled Iraqi society completely into the abyss. The collapse is still going on.

Millions of Iraqis are starving, and the lack of food is still increasing. Half of the nearly 30 million people are now living in extreme poverty. Some 55 percent have no clean drinking water, 80 percent are not connected to the sewage system. Electricity is available only an hour here, an hour there; the once good health and education systems are flattened. Had the development of the conditions in the 1980s continued, the infant mortality rate would now well below 20 per 1000 births. In fact, according to a study by the aid agency Save the Children, by 2005 it had increased to 125. Iraq had been recognized by UNESCO in 1987 for its education system; illiteracy had been almost eliminated. Now, the illiteracy rate has already increased to over 25 percent in some areas it is already 40-50 percent among women. In general, Iraqi women have lost their once very good position in society. According to UNDP's index, they fell to the level of Saudi Arabia. (See Iraq - The Forgotten Occupation)

There is no reason to assume that a "regime change" in Libya enforced by the NATO states would come out much better for the country (not to mention a long civil war and partition of the country altogether). Finally, the attacking forces and their agenda is almost identical and in many ways the leadership of the insurgency resembles the Iraqis that the U.S. set up in the government there -- that is, radical Islamic organizations and pro-Western, neo-liberal advocates of a complete opening to imperialism, and privatization of the economy of the country.

Note

Wikipedia is only partially useful regarding access to statistical data. As soon as it is playing a role in a current political debate, there is a danger of manipulation. After David Rothscum published on Feb. 23, 2011 his article, "The World Cheers As The CIA Libya Plunges Into Chaos" published in which he and others wrote that living in Libya, a lower percentage of people below the poverty line than in the Netherlands, the information in the Wikipedia article "List of countries by percentage of population living in poverty" to which Rothscum referred were changed. According to the Article-History on Feb. 15 a value of 7.4 percent could be found, since March 6 a reference is made in a footnote, without any listing of a source, that "around a third of the Libyans live at or below the national poverty line."

:: Article nr. 77210 sent on 28-apr-2011 05:04 ECT

www.uruknet.info?p=77210

*************--------*******

################################################========#########################

========================================================================****

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...