Make up your own Mind

Blue Link News

BOMBSHELL: US Caught Meddling in Russian Elections! ……..

http://www.sott.net
.
Tony Cartalucci
Global Research.ca
Fri, 09 Dec 2011 20:09 CST
Print

© http://en.rian.ru

What would Americans say if they found their polling stations and certain political parties entirely infiltrated by Chinese money, Chinese observers, and Chinese-backed candidates promoting China’s interests in an AMERICAN election? The answer ranges from incarceration, to trials featuring charges ranging from fraud, to sedition and even treason with sentences ranging from decades to life in prison, perhaps even death, as well as possible military action for what could easily be considered an act of war.

Indeed, the attempted subversion of a foreign nation and/or meddling in its elections are acts of war, an act of war the United States government through its various “Non-Governmental Organizations” (NGOs) have been committing on and off for decades around the globe. In fact, the very “Arab Spring” is a geopolitical conflagration tipped off by this vast network of Western backed NGOs.

The New York Times in its article, “U.S. Groups Helped Nurture Arab Uprisings,” clearly stated as much when it reported, “a number of the groups and individuals directly involved in the revolts and reforms sweeping the region, including the April 6 Youth Movement in Egypt, the Bahrain Center for Human Rights and grass-roots activists like Entsar Qadhi, a youth leader in Yemen, received training and financing from groups like the International Republican Institute, the National Democratic Institute and Freedom House, a nonprofit human rights organization based in Washington.”

The Times would continue by explaining, “the Republican and Democratic institutes are loosely affiliated with the Republican and Democratic Parties. They were created by Congress and are financed through the National Endowment for Democracy, which was set up in 1983 to channel grants for promoting democracy in developing nations. The National Endowment receives about $100 million annually from Congress. Freedom House also gets the bulk of its money from the American government, mainly from the State Department.”

These same NGOs have also just recently played a central role in Myanmar, blocking the construction of a mega-dam that would have begun the development of the nation’s rural areas, provided electricity for export and domestic use, and help irrigate surrounding agricultural land. These NGOs are currently creating a social divide in Thailand to subvert an 800 year old independent political institution that has for centuries weathered Western encroachment. There is also documented evidence of these NGOs attempting to destabilize the government of Malaysia and reinstall IMF minion Anwar Ibrahim back into power.

In Russia’s neighboring country and ally, Belarus, this network of US-funded NGOs have attempted to start a “Belarusian Spring” to overthrow leader Alexander Lukashenko, who has adamently opposed NATO’s creep toward its, and Russia’s borders. And now Russia itself has just rooted out a plot by these very same NGOs creeping in and around the nation’s political institutions, in an attempt to subvert and replace them.

Russia’s Long Fight Against US-funded Subversion.

This is not the first time Russia has faced this insidious creep from abroad. After the fall of the Soviet Union, there proceeded a lawless free-for-all where foreigners began rushing in in an attempt to create their own order out of the chaos. Leading this charge was billionaire oligarch Mikhail Khodorkovsky who fashioned an “Open Russian Foundation” and even had western corporate-financier elitists Jacob Rothschild and Henry Kissinger chair its board of directors. In a now all too familiar scenario, Khodorkovsky and his networks of foreign-funded NGOs attempted to consolidate and transfer Russia’s wealth, power, and the destiny of its people into the hands of Wall Street and London’s global “corporatatorship.”

Khodorkovsky, safely behind bars. In Russia, Wall Street and London’s mafia banksters go to prison.

Russia, however, was not entirely defenseless. In a devastating backlash, Khodorkovsky was thrown into a Siberian prison where he remains to this day, while other oligarchs serving Western interests scattered like cockroaches back to London and New York. In a hollow attempt to portray Russia’s efforts to preserve its national sovereignty as “human rights abuses,” Wall Street and London assembled a legal defense led by globalist lawyer Robert Amsterdam, who while still representing Khodorkovsky, is also defending another loser in Wall Street’s game to place their puppets in positions of power around the globe, Thaksin Shinawatra of Thailand.

Most recently, as Russia’s elections approach, AFP has claimed that NGOs such as US NED-funded Golos and New Times’ slon.ru, which regularly features columns by the now jailed and above mentioned Khodorkovsky, were attacked in order to prevent the exposure of “mass election fraud.” Why opposition groups and foreign-funded NGOs who have a direct vested interest in preventing Putin’s United Russia Party from obtaining a clean victory at the polls, should be trusted to reveal “mass election fraud” in the first place, is never quite explained by AFP.

NED’s official website lists an astounding number of meddlesome NGOs conducting activities across the Russian Federation that no American in their right mind would allow on US soil. Golos is just one of many NGOs funded by the United States government, overseen by the US Embassy in Russia, and used to meddle in the sovereign internal affairs of their nation.

AFP reported, “Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, whose United Russia party has won Sunday’s polls but with a reduced majority, has denounced non-governmental organisations like Golos, comparing them to the disciple Judas who betrayed Jesus.” And indeed, Golos is certifiably betraying the Russian people by taking foreign money and pursing a foreign agenda, masquerading as “pro-democracy” crusaders.

Golos’ activities, mirroring those in the US-engineered Arab Spring, include an online “Map of Violations” site detailing “claims” of fraud across Russia, in an attempt to undermine the legitimacy of upcoming elections Putin and is party are predicted to easily win. Golos’ Liliya Shibanova described their “Map of Violations” project as being a place where people could upload any information or evidence of election violations. This, being far from actual evidence, again mirrors the same tactics of manipulating public opinion in the midst of uprisings around the world, fueled by identical foreign-funded organizations where baseless claims of abuse, violence, and “human rights” violations made up the entirety of accusations then used by Western governments to diplomatically and militarily (in the case of Libya and now Syria) pressure targeted nations.

As in Belarus, where the the vice president of NED-funded FIDH, and ring leader of foreign-funded sedition within the Eastern European country, was imprisoned for over 4 years, in Russia, the government is openly exposing the enemy by name. This has also happened in Malaysia, where the ruling government has outed the “Bersih Clean and Fair Elections” movement as a conspiracy of foreign-corporate-financier interests aimed at destabilizing the country and installing a more favorable, proxy regime led by IMF minion Anwar Ibrahim.

Russian Subversion Coordinated by US Ambassador to Russia, Michael McFaul.

Russia would also wisely turn their attention to the US Embassy and recently confirmed Ambassador Michael McFaul, who serves on the board of directors of Freedom House and the National Endowment for Democracy, both now implicated in directly interfering in Russia’s sovereign affairs.

Michael McFaul, confirmed in November as US Ambassador to Russia, immediately set out to work, not to represent the interests, aspirations, and good will of the American people, but to execute the agenda of corporate-financier oligarchs, who in October sang praises regarding his accomplished background in foreign agitation and the possibilities his presence in Russia could yield. It also should be noted that McFaul is a Senior Associate of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, fully funded by the Fortune 500, Soros’ Open Society, and other corporate-funded foundations.

It was warned during October 2011 in “Agitator Nominated for Next US “Ambassador” to Russia,” as corporate-financier interests voiced their recommendations for McFaul that:

“The Brookings Institution recently published a “letter of recommendation” of sorts for McFaul, titled, “Give the Next Russian Ambassador a Powerful Tool to Guard Human Rights.” Already out of the gates, the article is disingenuously using the concept of “human rights” to leverage US interests over Russia. Written by Brookings’ own arch-Neo-Conservative Robert Kagan and Freedom House President David Kramer, the piece begins by immediately calling on the US Senate to confirm McFaul.

Kagan and Kramer claim the US should then arm McFaul with a bill to “sanction” Russian officials accused of “human rights abuses.” Judging from previous US-Russian relations, and in particular, Robert Amsterdam’s transparent, almost cartoonish crusade for his jailed client, Mikhail Khodorovsky, it can be assumed these “abuses” are referring to the jailing of political operatives for grave criminal activities while in the process of serving US corporate-financier interests.

The Brookings piece goes on to enumerate McFaul’s “merits” which include, “democracy promotion” (read: extraterritorial meddling), meeting with “civil society” representatives both in Russia and in neighboring nations (read: conspiring with US-funded NGOs and political opposition leaders), as well as having a good rapport with Russian opposition activists operating in Washington. Brookings notes in particular how important it is to have McFaul in Russia, on the ground to give his “assessment” of up-coming Russian elections. Unspoken, but sure to trickle through the headlines in coming months will be McFaul’s “democracy promotion” on behalf of select opposition parties in Russia’s political landscape.

As if to alleviate any doubt regarding just what Brookings means by “human rights abuses,” Kagan and Kramer then cite the case of UK financier operative Sergei Magnitsky of Hermitage Captial Mangement, an enterprise that while operating primarily in Russian markets, maintained its headquarters in the Cayman Islands.

Magnitsky was arrested and imprisoned over tax evasion and tax fraud, and would die of illness while in prison. The US and UK would predictably trump up the circumstances surrounding the death of Magnitsky, with corporate foundation-funded Redress (page 28) of the UK submitting a “report” to the UN in yet another classic example of leveraging issues of “human rights” against a target nation to serve Western interests. This is but a taste of what is to come with McFaul presiding over the next leg of Anglo-American global destabilization.

Brookings’ Kagan and Freedom House’s Kramer have nominated McFaul with the intention of further meddling in Russia’s sovereign affairs, as well as destabilizing its neighbors in a bid to hedge Russia’s reemergence as a sovereign world power, or perhaps even in an attempt to play a grand strategy of global tension, forcing the besieged developing world to consolidate under the West’s more overt attacks, only for the “union” to be co-opted and integrated into the Wall Street-London “international order” at a later point in time. Either way, McFaul does not represent the ideals, principles, or laws of the American people or the US Constitution, nor does he represent universal values of respecting national sovereignty.

His confirmation by the US Senate will indicate duplicity amongst the US Senate Committee on Foreign Relations and a further divergence between their actions and the will and aspirations of the American people who put them in office. McFaul represents a corporate-financier elite and their agenda of building an “international order” (read: empire) at the cost of yet more American treasure and lives, leaving an immensely wealthy elite lording over a destitute American majority.

By exposing both McFaul’s true “credentials” and intentions, as well as who he really works for and why, and by systematically boycotting and replacing the consumerist troughs that fuel this corporate-financier oligarchy we can rectify this obvious and ever-expanding divergence between what is best for America and what is pursued by the oligarchs that presume dominion over us.”

Russia and a growing number of other nations are openly exposing and holding accountable agents of sedition operating in their country, sent and funded by US tax payers’ money. It is time for the other shoe to drop, and for the people of the West to hold their governments accountable. As targeted nations begin exposing and jailing members of this global conspiracy, likewise the West must begin exposing the disingenuous peddlers of this agenda – namely the board of directors and trustees organizing these ploys and dolling out the funds used in this global destabilization, and hold them duly accountable for using tax payers’ money to fund political chaos abroad while economic and social decay consume Americans and Europeans at home.

Tony Cartalucci is a frequent contributor to Global Research. Global Research Articles by Tony Cartalucci

.

December 10, 2011 Posted by | Anti NWO, Covert Ops, New World Order, World Politics | , , , | Leave a Comment

War on Iran has already begun. Act before it threatens all of us ……..

Escalation of the covert US-Israeli campaign against Tehran risks a global storm. Opposition has to get more serious

Iranians honour dead Revolutionary Guards commander

Iranians carry honorary coffins and pictures of a Revolutionary Guards commander killed in an explosion at the Alghadir missile base. Photograph: Stringer/Iran/Reuters

They don’t give up. After a decade of blood-drenched failure in Afghanistan and Iraq, violent destabilisation of Pakistan and Yemen, the devastation of Lebanon and slaughter in Libya, you might hope the US and its friends had had their fill of invasion and intervention in the Muslim world.

It seems not. For months the evidence has been growing that a US-Israeli stealth war against Iran has already begun, backed by Britain and France. Covert support for armed opposition groups has spread into a campaign of assassinations of Iranian scientists, cyber warfare, attacks on military and missile installations, and the killing of an Iranian general, among others.

The attacks are not directly acknowledged, but accompanied by intelligence-steered nods and winks as the media are fed a stream of hostile tales – the most outlandish so far being an alleged Iranian plot to kill the Saudi ambassador to the US – and the western powers ratchet up pressure for yet more sanctions over Iran’s nuclear programme.

The British government’s decision to take the lead in imposing sanctions on all Iranian banks and pressing for an EU boycott of Iranian oil triggered the trashing of its embassy in Tehran by demonstrators last week and subsequent expulsion of Iranian diplomats from London.

It’s a taste of how the conflict can quickly escalate, as was the downing of a US spyplane over Iranian territory at the weekend. What one Israeli official has called a “new kind of war” has the potential to become a much more old-fashioned one that would threaten us all.

Last month the Guardian was told by British defence ministry officials that if the US brought forward plans to attack Iran (as they believed it might), it would “seek, and receive, UK military help”, including sea and air support and permission to use the ethnically cleansed British island colony of Diego Garcia.

Whether the officials’ motive was to soften up public opinion for war or warn against it, this was an extraordinary admission: the Britain military establishment fully expects to take part in an unprovoked US attack on Iran – just as it did against Iraq eight years ago.

What was dismissed by the former foreign secretary Jack Straw as “unthinkable”, and for David Cameron became an option not to be taken “off the table”, now turns out to be as good as a done deal if the US decides to launch a war that no one can seriously doubt would have disastrous consequences. But there has been no debate in parliament and no mainstream political challenge to what Straw’s successor, David Miliband, this week called the danger of “sleepwalking into a war with Iran”. That’s all the more shocking because the case against Iran is so spectacularly flimsy.

There is in fact no reliable evidence that Iran is engaged in a nuclear weapons programme. The latest International Atomic Energy Agency report once again failed to produce a smoking gun, despite the best efforts of its new director general, Yukiya Amano – described in a WikiLeaks cable as “solidly in the US court on every strategic decision”.

As in the runup to the invasion of Iraq, the strongest allegations are based on “secret intelligence” from western governments. But even the US national intelligence director, James Clapper, has accepted that the evidence suggests Iran suspended any weapons programme in 2003 and has not reactivated it.

The whole campaign has an Alice in Wonderland quality about it. Iran, which says it doesn’t want nuclear weapons, is surrounded by nuclear-weapon states: the US – which also has forces in neighbouring Afghanistan and Iraq, as well as military bases across the region – Israel, Russia, Pakistan and India.

Iran is of course an authoritarian state, though not as repressive as western allies such as Saudi Arabia. But it has invaded no one in 200 years. It was itself invaded by Iraq with western support in the 1980s, while the US and Israel have attacked 10 countries or territories between them in the past decade. Britain exploited, occupied and overthrew governments in Iran for over a century. So who threatens who exactly?

As Israel’s defence minister, Ehud Barak, said recently, if he were an Iranian leader he would “probably” want nuclear weapons. Claims that Iran poses an “existential threat” to Israel because President Ahmadinejad said the state “must vanish from the page of time” bear no relation to reality. Even if Iran were to achieve a nuclear threshold, as some suspect is its real ambition, it would be in no position to attack a state with upwards of 300 nuclear warheads, backed to the hilt by the world’s most powerful military force.

The real challenge posed by Iran to the US and Israel has been as an independent regional power, allied to Syria and the Lebanese Hezbollah and Palestinian Hamas movements. As US troops withdraw from Iraq, Saudi Arabia fans sectarianism, and Syrian opposition leaders promise a break with Iran, Hezbollah and Hamas, the threat of proxy wars is growing across the region.

A US or Israeli attack on Iran would turn that regional maelstrom into a global firestorm. Iran would certainly retaliate directly and through allies against Israel, the US and US Gulf client states, and block the 20% of global oil supplies shipped through the Strait of Hormuz. Quite apart from death and destruction, the global economic impact would be incalculable.

All reason and common sense militate against such an act of aggression. Meir Dagan, the former head of Israel’s Mossad, said last week it would be a “catastrophe”. Leon Panetta, the US defence secretary, warned that it could “consume the Middle East in confrontation and conflict that we would regret”.

There seems little doubt that the US administration is deeply wary of a direct attack on Iran. But in Israel, Barak has spoken of having less than a year to act; Binyamin Netanyahu, the prime minister, has talked about making the “right decision at the right moment”; and the prospects of drawing the US in behind an Israeli attack have been widely debated in the media.

Maybe it won’t happen. Maybe the war talk is more about destabilisation than a full-scale attack. But there are undoubtedly those in the US, Israel and Britain who think otherwise. And the threat of miscalculation and the logic of escalation could tip the balance decisively. Unless opposition to an attack on Iran gets serious, this could become the most devastating Middle East war of all.

.

December 7, 2011 Posted by | Anti War, Covert Ops, Middle East, World at War ( not the Game ) | , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment

Pic of the Day : Conspiracy Stuff …………

September 25, 2011 Posted by | Anti NWO, Covert Ops, Media Lies, Satire, World Revolution | | Leave a Comment

Major General Chief Of Military Intelligence Says 911 Is An Inside Job ……..

September 22, 2011 Posted by | 9/11, Covert Ops, Disinformation, Media Lies, World People | , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off

Western Troops in Libya !! …….

Watch carefully the two Guys in the back ,as soon as one sees the TV camera he ducks and try to hide!

September 20, 2011 Posted by | Covert Ops, Disinformation, Middle East, World at War ( not the Game ), World Politics | , , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off

9/11 TRUTH: Jewish Ex-Marine SPEAKS OUT on Israeli Involvement (MUST WATCH) …….

September 14th, 2011

(PressTV)

Video Israel DOES NOT want you to see and the U.S. Mainstream Media WON’T SHOW YOU.

 

2011 Interview of Alan Sabrosky regarding 9/11 truth. – September 4th, 2011

September 15, 2011 Posted by | 9/11, Anti NWO, Covert Ops, Disinformation, New World Order, World at War ( not the Game ), World People, Zionism | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off

#WikiLeaks – US, France Knew In 2007 Financial Collapse Was Imminent Due To Wall Street Fraud ……..

Posted by

September 3, 2011 at 8:29 pm ,

Source via Alexander Higgins Blog 

WikiLeaks 07PARIS4109 PAULSON DISCUSSES FINANCIAL MARKETS IRAN WITH SARKOZY

In 2007 top US and France officials knew rampant fraud being committed by regulators, rating agencies and Wall Street Banks would soon cause a global financial collapse.Wall

While investors and nations around the world were happily giving trillions of dollars away to crooked Wall Street bankers top officials in the United States and France knew the market would soon collapse and people would be robbed of millions.

While raising the issue that the role of government regulators and rating agencies needed to be reviewed in the wake of the upcoming crisis, US officials ignored calls from the French government to enact necessary regulation to stop the rampant fraud that would soon result in investors losing tens of trillions of dollars they had invested into the markets.

The cable reveals that while discussing the ability of the French banks to survive the crisis, French President Sarkozy was pushing the US to enact regulations to forestall the crisis. Instead, Henry Paulson responded by telling Sarkozy not to overreacted because the” it would take months, not weeks, for credit to be re-priced” telling France this is “not a major crisis.”

Paulson went on to warn that the major problem was with the German banks and which would require a bailout from the taxpayer while warning that the assets held by banks but covered up from investors by being held off-balance sheet presented systematic risk to banks and to sovereign wealth.

The cable clearly reveals that taxpayer bailouts would be needed.  Paulson further up sticks up for the Wall Street hedge fund saying they were not to blame for the crisis while acknowledging there were major Wall Street transparency issues.

To summarize, the cable reveals that top government officials in France and the US knew Wall street banks were committing fraud in the origination and packaging of sub-prime mortgage and lying to investors about the resulting securities they were creating and selling. Officials knew banks were also lying about their own liabilities and hiding them from investors by keeping the assets off their balance sheets.  The government also knew that both regulators and ratings agencies were participating in the scheme.

Remember as you read this cable, these conversations all took place over a year before the 2008 financial collapse when taxpayers around the world were forced into giving up trillions of dollars for banker bailouts. Also keep in mind that while the cable discusses “systemic risk”, “bailouts” and “market turbulence”, none of these had happened yet. They were discussing what would soon happen in the future.

The discussion of “systemic risk”, “market turbulence” and “taxpayer bailouts” over a year before the markets actually collapsed and those events actually occurred, show they knew a global financial collapse. Not only did they know it would occur but knew what the consequences would be for the investors and the governments who were fleeced by Wall Street. As the cable reveals, Paulson chose to deal with the crisis by letting it continue and urging France to keep the issue underwaps  by  urging Sarkozy not  to “over react”, hence allowing the scandal to the continue which just postponed the inevitable.

Also remember when we were forced into these bailouts, it was  under the guise that our governments had no idea the banks were doing this and this was a sudden and unforeseeable crisis. Finally, remember that – while there have been plenty of accusations from “conspiracy theorists”,  “fringe economists” and “wing nut” politicians such as Ron Paul – there still has been no admission from our government that financial regulators or the ratings agencies played a role in the crisis.

 

PAULSON DISCUSSES FINANCIAL MARKETS, IRAN WITH SARKOZY, LAGARDEPAULSON DISCUSSES FINANCIAL MARKETS, IRAN WITH SARKOZY, LAGARDE

Subject PAULSON DISCUSSES FINANCIAL MARKETS, IRAN WITH SARKOZY, LAGARDE
Origin Embassy Paris (France)
Cable time 2007-10-01 10:46 UTC
Classification CONFIDENTIAL
Source http://wikileaks.org/cable/2007/10/07PARIS4109.html
History First published on WES, 30 Sep 2011 01:44 UTC

Viewing cable 07PARIS4109, PAULSON DISCUSSES FINANCIAL MARKETS, IRAN WITH SARKOZY, LAGARDE

If you are new to these pages, please read an introduction on the structure of a cable as well as how to discuss them with others. See also the FAQs
Reference ID Created Released Classification Origin
07PARIS4109 2007-10-01 10:46 2011-08-30 01:44 CONFIDENTIAL Embassy Paris

 

VZCZCXRO3134
RR RUEHDBU RUEHFL RUEHKW RUEHLA RUEHROV RUEHSR
DE RUEHFR #4109/01 2741046
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
R 011046Z OCT 07
FM AMEMBASSY PARIS
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 0558
RUEATRS/DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY WASHDC
RHEHNSC/NSC WASHINGTON DC
INFO RUEHZL/EUROPEAN POLITICAL COLLECTIVE

 

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 PARIS 004109 

SIPDIS 

SIPDIS 

E.O. 12958:  DECL:09/18/17
TAGS: EFIN ECON PREL FR
SUBJECT: PAULSON DISCUSSES FINANCIAL MARKETS, IRAN WITH SARKOZY,
LAGARDE 

Classified by EMIN Seth Winnick for reasons 1.4 (b) and (d) 

1. (C) Summary: In successive meetings Treasury Secretary Hank
Paulson told Minister of Finance Christine Lagarde and President
Nicolas Sarkozy that it was important not to overreact to
financial market turbulence.  Sarkozy asked for U.S. support for
Dominique Strauss-Kahn's candidacy for IMF Managing Director.
Discussions also touched on continued cooperation on Iran,
Sarkozy's reform agenda and China.  End summary. 

2. (C) During a September 17 visit to France, Treasury Secretary
Paulson and accompanying delegation met with Sarkozy and
Lagarde, and lunched with leading representatives of France's
business community.  Sarkozy made a strong push for public U.S.
support for Dominique Strauss-Kahn's candidacy for Managing
Director of the IMF. Calling Strauss-Kahn the "smartest
socialist," Sarkozy said it was important not to encourage
President Putin by entertaining the candidacy Czech Josef
Tosovksy, who has KGB ties. 

3. (C) In response to Secretary Paulson's urging that France's
business and financial sectors reduce exposure to Iran, Sarkozy
said the United States could count on French cooperation in
toughening sanctions.  "There will be no double talk from
France. Stopping the bomb is more important than business
contracts."  But Sarkozy said unilateral legislation under
consideration in the U.S. Congress would be a "disaster" and
make the Iranians "very happy."  Sarkozy's diplomatic advisor
Jean-David Levitte noted that France would look to work, if
necessary, outside the Security Council, notably with EU
partners, on further measures against Iran. 

4. (C) On sub-prime-related market turbulence, Sarkozy said regulation was needed to forestall 
such events and minimize impact on global economic growth. Paulson underscored the importance of 
not over-reacting. It would take months, not weeks, for credit to be re-priced, 
but this was "not a major crisis." Several issues were coming into focus: conduits and other 
off-balance sheet funding vehicles had been a surprise; in the U.S. there was a need to look at mortgage 
origination, as well as the role of regulatory supervision and rating agencies. Asked for his views 
on French banks, Paulson said they had strong balance sheets and were profitable, though they, too, might 
have challenging off-balance 
sheet obligations. Paulson said the German Landesbanken were "the biggest problem," though they presented 
little systemic risk and would be bailed out by the German taxpayer. 

5. (C) Sarkozy asked for views on U.S. exchange rate policy.
Paulson said the United States supported a strong dollar.
Exchange rates ultimately were market-driven and the U.S. would
pursue policies that increased confidence in the U.S. economy.
In an exchange on China, Paulson said the U.S. message to China
was that if it wanted to be a "member of the club," it needed to
adhere to global norms on issues such as Sudan, Iran as well as
market-determined exchange rates.  The real concern was not that
China's economy would pass that of the United States, but that
China would reform too slowly and ultimately run into problems.
Paulson asked Sarkozy to "make a big impact" in China by
carrying a similar message. 

6. (C) In a brief exchange on trade issues, Sarkozy said France
was not afraid of globalization, but would insist on reciprocity
in its foreign relations.  Sarkozy was not shocked that the
United States defended its farmers: "we're doing the same."
Paulson pushed Sarkozy to help "drive Doha to a conclusion."
Sarkozy would "do (his) best," butQould not support a deal that
was not fair to France. 

Lagarde on Economic Reform, China and Financial Markets
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

7. (C) Finance Minister Lagarde sketched out GOF reform
priorities, saying the real focus would be on France's social
programs and associated costs.  Reform of the so-called "special
pension regimes" for certain categories of public workers
(including rail workers) was high on the agenda.  The GOF wanted
to bring such pensions in line with those of other public sector
employees.  Lagarde acknowledged that the issue had brought down
the Juppe government in the mid 1990s, but said the GOF would be
tough on pension reform.  Product market reform - including
changes to distribution and retail sectors - was also in the
offing. 

8. (C) Touching on issues subsequently raised by Sarkozy,
Lagarde said the GOF wanted strong cooperation on Iran.  She
suggested an informal U.S. Treasury - Ministry of Finance "task
force" be created to look at Iran-related banking issues.
Paulson noted that BNP-Paribas had suspended work in Iran, but
that Natixis had become more active.  Beyond the financial 

PARIS 00004109  002 OF 002 

sector, it would be important to look at the role of industrial
companies in Iran, Paulson said.  Although France's exports to
Iran were a small percentage of its overall exports, they
represented 8% of Iran's imports.  French Treasury director
Xavier Musca underscored the importance of the U.S. consulting
with the GOF before engaging directly with French banks on Iran. 

9. (C) Lagarde and Musca worried about China's (as well as the
UAE's) role as financier for Iran, as well as its undermining of
good governance efforts in Africa with easy money.  More
generally, Lagarde said the weakness of the yuan was "hurting
our economies."  The 9/14 informal Ecofin meeting in Porto saw
agreement to add exchange rate issues to the EU - China summit
agenda in November.  Lagarde suggested that Brazil and South
Africa be brought in on the issue.  Paulson said the U.S. was
pushing for reform and financial market opening in China, and
"this would help all investors."  He agreed to raise yuan
exchange rate issue with RSA Finance Minister Trevor Manuel in
the context of the November G-20 finance ministers meeting. 

10. (C) On financial market issues, Lagarde said the large French banks were strong, 
with minimal exposure to asset-backed securities. She was "fairly confident" that the smaller 
banks were also well-positioned. Market transparency and related issues had been discussed in Porto, 
and would be the subject of ongoing consultations within the EU. Paulson said the President's Working Group 
on Financial Markets was looking at similar issues, including conduits and off-balance-sheet items of 
regulated institutions. But it was important to guard against overreaction. In particular Paulson said he sensed 
that Europe was "obsessed" with hedge funds. Though the link to regulated institutions (via bank lending) 
was an important issue, it was hard to blame hedge funds for current market turbulence. Asked about sovereign 
wealth funds, Lagarde saidQ the issue was not as big a deal in France as it was in Germany. 

11. (U) The Paulson delegation has cleared this cable. 

STAPLETON.

September 12, 2011 Posted by | Covert Ops, Gran Theft Economics | , , , , , , , | Comments Off

Former Malaysian PM: ‘Bush lied about 9/11 terror attacks’ ………

Voltaire Network | 10 September 2011

+

Mahathir Mohamad says it is not unthinkable for former US President George W. Bush to lie about who was responsible for the 9/11 terror attacks on the American soil. [Editor’s note: Then-Prime Minister Mohamad is shown in the photo (L) with William Rodriguez, 9/11 hero and the "last man out" of the Towers at a private 9/11 presentation.]

In a post published in his personal blog chedet on Friday, former Malaysian prime minister said that the attacks on the World Trade Center in downtown Manhattan, New York City, and the Pentagon in Arlington, Virginia, could not have been carried out by Muslims. The acts of violence could have rather been the work of other groups.

The Malaysian politician pointed out that “for some Americans, the deaths of nearly 3,000 people was not the scariest thing about 9/11. It was realizing who carried out the attack: yes, the American Government.”

Mohamad said although Arab Muslims are angry enough to sacrifice their lives and become bombers, they are not capable of planning and strategizing attacks similar to the 9/11 ones.

The planning [for the 9/11 attacks] must have taken a considerable length of time. The candidates had to learn to fly in tiny aircrafts…. Planning to hijack four aircraft simultaneously would require great precision in timing and logistics. One aircraft maybe. But four simultaneously!! I don’t think extremists from Saudi Arabia can carry out this highly sophisticated operation with such success,” former Malaysian prime minister commented.

Turning to the collapse of the World Trade Center twin towers, he said, “They came down nicely upon themselves without toppling against the other buildings close by. It looks more like planned demolition of buildings than collapse consequent upon being hit by aircraft.”

Mohamad stated, “A third building also collapsed in the same fashion; although it was not hit by any aircraft. What is the explanation for this untouched building, which collapsed upon itself and did not damage other buildings nearby?

He also questioned the total disappearance of the aircraft, which hit the Pentagon building in Arlington, Virginia. “There was no debris of any kind, no broken parts of the aircraft, no black box, and no human bodies flung into the surroundings. Is it possible for an aircraft to vaporize totally after a crash?” former Malaysian prime minister said.

Mohamad further raised questions over the loss of the fourth aircraft, which was supposed to have crashed in an open field. “Again no sign of any debris. No big crater. Did it vaporize into nothingness? Did the innocent passengers also vaporize?” he stated.

The Malaysian politician noted that the American press was strangely silent about 9/11 attacks.

He also emphasized that Bush is the one that lied about Saddam’s weapons of mass destruction. “The legacy of the former US president is that two countries (Iraq and Afghanistan) have been devastated, and fratricidal wars have become endemic. Hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, Afghans and a few thousand of young American soldiers have died. Thousands more are wounded, maimed for life, and suffering from mental breakdowns,” Mohamad pointed out.

Former Malaysian prime minister also said that human lives do not seem to mean much to the former US president.

.

September 10, 2011 Posted by | 9/11, Anti NWO, Covert Ops, Disinformation, New World Order, World People, World Politics | , , , , , , , | Comments Off

Secret Gaddafi Files Show U.S. Helping Both Sides in Libya …….

September 8, 2011 Posted by | Covert Ops, Disinformation, Middle East, World Politics | , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off

CIA Blackwater Op Infiltrated Ron Paul Campaign …….

September 5, 2011 Posted by | Anti War, Covert Ops, Middle East, World at War ( not the Game ) | , , , , , , , | Comments Off

Thierry Meyssan on the Invasion of Tripoli – Critical Eyewitness account (English) (Sept 2, 2011) ……..

.

September 4, 2011 Posted by | Anti War, Covert Ops, Disinformation, Genocides, Gran Theft Economics, Middle East, World at War ( not the Game ), World Politics | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off

9/11: Gordon Duff Discusses New Video of Cruise Missile Attack on Press TV ……

http://www.veteranstoday.com

1Share

‘Pentagon attacked by a cruise missile not a passenger plane’

Leaked videos of the 9/11 attack against the Pentagon confirm eyewitness accounts that the attack was not carried out by a passenger plane as officially stated but was rather the work of a cruise missile hitting the building from a different angle.
YouTube – Veterans Today -

“There were 85 videos; a second video was released yesterday (August 29). Now it hasn’t been carefully vetted but it appears to be quite genuine that clearly shows a cruise missile from another angle hitting the Pentagon,” Gordon Duff, senior editor of Veterans Today, told Press TV’s U.S. Desk on Tuesday.

The people at the scene of the attack including CNN reporters say that they saw no plane wreckage following the attack, Duff added.

He said there are “reliable reports” from airline pilots stating that it would be “impossible” for the plane and any pilot including the top air force and navy pilots and the Top Gun instructors to have flown a plane to have accomplished what was accomplished.

“We have engineers at Boeing the company that manufactured the plane that supposedly hit the Pentagon that say it couldn’t fly that fast, it can’t fly that low, it can’t make those turns and it couldn’t have been there,” the investigative journalist added.

He further said that other physical evidence gathered at the scene of the attack against the Pentagon all indicate that it could not have been carried out by a passenger plane. Duff concluded that “it is our belief that members of the U.S. government and one other foreign government were complicit in the planning and execution of the attacks on 9/11.”

.

comment from admin. “as for me ; it was allways a cruise missile that hit the pentagon” !

.

September 1, 2011 Posted by | 9/11, Anti NWO, Anti War, Big Brother, Covert Ops, Disinformation, New World Order, World at War ( not the Game ), World People, World Politics | , , , , , , , | Comments Off

US Drug Thirst, Gun Sales Must Share Blame for Monterey Casino Tragedy, Mexican President Says …..

http://www.truth-out.org

.
Saturday 27 August 2011
by: Tim Johnson, McClatchy Newspapers | Report

President Felipe Calderon. (Photo: Gobierno Federal / Flickr)

Mexico City – His voice cracking with emotion, President Felipe Calderon said Friday that the United States bore some blame for “an act of terror” by gangsters who doused a casino with gasoline and set a blaze that killed at least 52 people.

The attack Thursday in Monterrey, an industrial city of 4 million barely a two-hour drive from Texas, stunned Mexicans and seemed likely to mark a watershed in the country’s intensifying war against criminal syndicates.

In a 20-minute televised address to the nation, Calderon gave an unusually blunt assessment of the causes of Mexico’s surging violence before flying to Monterrey to place a wreath at the burned-out hulk of the Casino Royale.

He referred repeatedly to the attack as a terrorist act, elevating the conflict to a new level, at least linguistically, and casting it in terms of a broader struggle for control of Mexico.

He said rampant corruption within his nation’s judiciary and law enforcement bore some blame.

But in unprecedented, direct criticism of the United States, Calderon said lax U.S. gun laws and high demand for drugs stoked his nation’s violence.

He appealed to U.S. citizens “to reflect on the tragedy that we are living through in Mexico.”

“We are neighbors, allies and friends. But you, too, are responsible. This is my message,” Calderon said.

He called on the United States to “once and for all stop the criminal sale of high-powered weapons and assault rifles to criminals that operate in Mexico.”

Calderon declared three days of national mourning. The motive of Thursday’s attack wasn’t clear, but authorities indicated that it might have been part of an extortion campaign against one of many casinos that operate in Mexico on the margins of the law.

Calderon’s blast at the United States underscored frustrations here that there’s little appreciation north of the border for the role Americans have played in strengthening the cartels that are responsible for the grisly violence that’s claimed as many as 40,000 lives in the last five years.

With weapons bought in the United States, the gangs, whose roots lie in drug smuggling but which have branched out into a variety of criminal enterprises, are better armed than the police tasked with combating them.

While Calderon’s government has captured dozens of mid- and upper-level gangsters, beheadings, public executions and kidnappings are epidemic, and many Mexicans feel less safe than ever.

“Part of the tragedy that we Mexicans are living through has to do with the fact that we are next to the world’s greatest drug consumer,” Calderon said in his speech, “and also the greatest global arms vendor that pays billions of dollars each year to criminals.”

In a statement, President Barack Obama condemned “the barbaric and reprehensible attack” and lauded Mexico’s “brave fight to disrupt transnational criminal organizations that threaten both Mexico and the United States.”

Of the 52 who died in Thursday’s firebombing, 35 were women, mostly in their 40s, 50s and 60s, who were passing time in the casino on a weekday afternoon, civil defense officials said.

Ten people were injured in the blaze.

A video taken by a closed-circuit camera that overlooks the casino’s entrance showed that the attack unfolded in only two and a half minutes.

Four vehicles can be seen pulling into the driveway of the Casino Royale, on San Jeronimo Avenue in a posh area of western Monterrey, at 3:48 p.m.

Gunmen jump out of the cars and enter the casino, carrying three canisters apparently filled with gasoline.

Moments later, gamblers and employees are seen scuttling from the building.

Black smoke then pours from the casino as the assailants jump into the vehicles and drive off.

Witnesses who fled the casino said the gunmen shouted at gamblers to flee before setting the building ablaze, indicating that they didn’t seek a high casualty count.

Initial reports said the gunmen sprayed gunfire inside the casino, but Nuevo Leon Gov. Rodrigo Medina said none of the 52 victims discovered by Friday morning had bullet wounds.

“It was an indescribable scene,” said Reynaldo Ramos of Monterrey Civil Defense.

Most victims died from smoke inhalation rather than direct contact with fire, he said.

Cell phones on the bodies of victims rang constantly as rescuers removed them, he added.

He said some 300 people were in the casino at the time of the attack.

No arrests were made immediately.

The Attorney General’s Office offered a $2.5 million reward for information leading to the conviction of the attackers.

Monterrey is seen as a bellwether for Mexico’s rising chaos.

Home to some of Mexico’s biggest companies and with the highest standard of living in the nation, with a per capita income of $18,000 per year, the city has been identified with booming entrepreneurship.

As recently as early last year, Monterrey was hailed as a safe, prosperous city, a Mexican version of Dallas or Houston.

But a turf war between large criminal syndicates, the Gulf Cartel and Los Zetas, now unfolds in city streets daily.

Drive-by shootings, roadblocks, gangland grenade attacks and bodies hanging from overpasses are common.

Earlier this week, gangsters hung a still living victim by the neck from a pedestrian walkway in the city in broad daylight, then took potshots at the victim with weapons.

Local media said that one of the main investors in Casino Royale is a company, Atracciones y Emociones Vallarta, that operates 26 casinos across northern Mexico.

Its owners are reportedly relatives of a former mayor of Monterrey.

Gangs routinely shake down casinos for payoffs.

On Wednesday, gunmen threw a grenade at a casino in the city of Saltillo in northern Coahuila state.

Anger at Calderon, who’s in the final 15 months of his six-year term, boiled over on social media, a sign of the sagging support for his policy of direct confrontation with cartels.

Since he came to office in late 2006, Mexico has tallied around 40,000 murders.

“Sometimes I would like to leave the country but it is MY COUNTRY. Make them leave,” a Twitter post by Roduguevara said.

© 2011 McClatchy-Tribune Information Services

Truthout has licensed this content. It may not be reproduced by any other source and is not covered by our Creative Commons license.

.

.

August 27, 2011 Posted by | Americas, Covert Ops | , , , , , , | Comments Off

Norway Premier “Begged” Putin To Stop Massacre Planned By “Elites” ………

Posted by EU Times on Jul 25th, 2011

A startling Federal Security Service (FSB) report on the 22 July massacre in Norway states that two-days prior to this catastrophic attack Norwegian Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg [photo top right with Putin] placed an “urgent” call to Putin “begging” Russia’s leader to help stop the events that left nearly 100 innocent civilians dead.

According to the FSB, Stoltenberg first learned of this plot against his country this past Wednesday after reading a “top secret” report prepared for him by the Norwegian Intelligence Service (NIS) on the late March computer attack against Norway’s top military leaders that showed them involved in a conspiracy with Britain’s MI5 Security Service and the United States Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) to launch a “two-phase” attack upon Norway modeled after false-flag operations in both Australia and America in the mid-nineties.

The false-flag operations being modeled in Norway were based on the 19 April 1995 bombing attack on the Oklahoma Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building said caused a lone right-wing Christian fundamentalist who used a fertilizer bomb that killed 168, and the 28 April 1996 Port Arthur massacre in Australia where a lone gunman killed 35 mainly because the police failed to show up in a timely manner, and which the aftermath of both attacks caused a fundamental shift away from freedoms and liberties these peoples once enjoyed.

The FSB further reports that this false-flag attack on Norway was a “clear textbook example” of an Operation Northwoods operation designed and prepared by US Military experts. Operation Northwoods was a series of false-flag proposals that originated within the United States government in 1962. The proposals called for the CIA or other operatives, to commit acts of terrorism in US cities and elsewhere in order to influence public opinion and have been used by many Western governments over these past five decades.

FSB experts note in this report that the false-flag attacks on Norway further mirror those of Oklahoma City and Port Arthur in: 1.) A large vehicle holding a powerful fertilizer bomb was able to gain undetected entrance to a protected government centre; 2.) The armed police response to an ongoing massacre of civilians was delayed for reasons still not explained; 3.) A lone suspect has been indentified as the sole perpetrator of the attacks contrary to witness statements that more people were involved; 4.) The lone suspect is denied the right to an open hearing before the public.

This report also notes that within hours of these attacks occurring, a “virtual flood” of information relating to the suspected mastermind of this massacre was released indentifying him as a “blond-haired blue-eyed” Norwegian named Anders Behring Breivik and caricatured as a right-wing Christian fundamentalist. A person which (coincidentally?) the United States had warned barely 24-hours earlier in a video released by their Department of Homeland Security (DHS) was the type of person they feared most would carry out such a terror attack.

The critical problem with the flood of information being released on/or by Breivik, the FSB asserts, is to what is true and what isn’t. This issue was made even more important by American computer experts noting that the Facebook page said belonging to Breivik appears to have been faked, and as they note:

1: Why is there a version of Anders Behring Breivik’s Facebook profile not showing Christian / Conservative? Even Google’s cache of the Facebook profile retrieved on Jul 22, 2011 23:52:36 GMT supports this factor.

2: How was Christian / Conservative added prior to the profile being removed from Facebook? If our PDF was printed out/saved at Jul 23 01:39 GMT, and the profile was deleted soon afterwards by Facebook, how was a detained Anders Behring Breivik able to change it?

3: Which then needs to be asked, Who had access to in changing the Profile before it was removed?

Aside from the “most likely” faked Facebook page, Breivik is, also, said to have posted an astonishingly detailed 1,500-page manifesto and video [view on left] titled “2083: A European Declaration Of Independence” datelined “London, 2011” on the Internet that claims “the number of Muslims in Western Europe is “reaching critical mass” and there is a core of Cultural Communist elites in Western Europe who really want to destroy Western civilization” and that “Europe will burn again.”

Breivik further said he regarded himself as a successor to the medieval Knights Templar, and claimed to have been recruited at a meeting in London in April 2002, which was hosted by two English extremists and attended by eight people in total. Breivik’s ties with London, and hence MI5, was due to his father being a top economist at the Norwegian Embassy in London where Anders was described as a “mummy’s boy” and “privileged” son of an elite liberal family. [Especially interesting to note about this description of “mummy boy” Breivik is his stating that the main target of his attack was Norway’s “Mother of the Nation” and former Prime Minister Gro Harlem Brundtland.]

The FSB, however, in this report disputes Breivik’s ties with the Knights Templar stating, instead, that this false-flag attack has provided an “ancillary benefit” to the West’s royal and banking elite classes in discrediting this ancient order as “open warfare” between them looms, and as we had detailed in our 21 July report “Murdoch Threat To Expose Obama As “Christ-Child” Ignites Western Fury.”

To the reason(s) behind this attack, this FSB report states, is a “desperate attempt” by British, European Union and American banking interests to force Norway into their “union” [Norway is not a member of the EU] in order to loot their Sovereign Wealth Fund of its estimated $1.5 Trillion in wealth which without the entire Western economy may collapse. Important note, the FSB says, is that what is being done to Norway has already been done to Libya when in what is now called the “Financial Heist of the Century” these same elites launched an unprovoked attack upon this North African nation and promptly looted it of nearly $150 Billion of their Sovereign Wealth Fund in order to sustain their crumpling empire.

Though there is more, much more, contained in this FSB report that we will have to examine further in order to report to you on it accurately upon it. So, and in closing this first report on this tragedy we’ll end with some of the words attributed to Breivik that in light of what this whole issue is being made out to be do, indeed, note us paying attention to them:

“A majority of the people I know support my views, they are just apathetic. They know that there will be a confrontation one day, but they don’t care because it will most likely not happen within the next two decades I am a pioneer in this fight, and I have no doubt whatsoever that we will see a political shift in our favor sooner than we might expect. It might look grim at the moment, but we are after all fighting a self-defeating ideology (Cultural Communism that is, not Islam). The only pragmatic approach towards Islam is to isolate it to Muslim countries once we are in a position to do so — on September 11th, 2083.”

Source

.

July 26, 2011 Posted by | Anti NWO, Covert Ops, New World Order, World Politics | , , , , , , , , | Comments Off

U.S Government Smuggled Missles, Grenades And Other Military Grade Weapons To Mexico Drug Cartels …….

  – July 23, 2011 at 2:36 am – Permalink Source via Alexander Higgins Blog

Another Mexico Drug Cartel Leader Arrested, Says Guns Supplied Exclusively By U.S Government

The U.S government weapons smuggling scandal grown from a simple gun smuggling scandal into a full blown military grade weapons smuggling scandal following the arrest of a Zetas cartel leader.  Law enforcement officials report the U.S government has supplied the Zetas cartel with, among other things, “an array of military grade weapons, grenade and grenade launchers, high-powered rifles, body armor, anti-aircraft missiles, and night vision goggles.”

The nation was shocked when  the U.S government was caught red handed smuggling guns to drug cartels in Mexico after government supplied guns were linked to the murders of law enforcement officials working along the U.S. Mexico border.

The scandal deepened when the hacker group ‘Anonymous’ leaked reported government documents on the Internet which appear to show that the leader of the La Familia cartel in Mexico was actually the feds point man for the gun smuggling operation.  Although the revelations revealed in data release was not confirmed by the Obama administration the information became part of a congressional investigation into the scandal.

Soon after the news of La Familia cartel scandal broke, the leader of the Zetas cartel leader Jesús Enrique Rejón Aguilar, aka El Mamito was arrested in Mexico. During an interrogation by the police, El Mamito stated  the Zetas cartel was exclusively supplied guns by the U.S. government.

Critics charged that while the Obama administration was smuggling guns to criminals they were using the violence perpetrated by those same criminals as a justification to take guns away from U.S. citizens.

As the congressional investigation into the scandal continued  new discovered evidence revealed the government gun smuggling operations were not limited to Mexico. In fact, congressional leaders uncovered  a sister operation ran out of Florida being used to smuggle guns into Puerto Rico and Honduras.

As the Obama officials moved to distance themselves from the growing  scandal Kenneth Melson, the ATF’s acting director, came forward and accused the Justice Department covering up evidence to shield officials from the scandal.

Today comes reports that  a wide array of U.S. government military grade equipment is being stashed in safe houses inside of the U.S., that that controlled and owned by the Zetas drug cartel, from where they are smuggled into Mexico.

According to conservative examiner Anthony Martin, “The weapons stashes discovered b law enforcement, Border Patrol, and other agencies contain ample evidence of dozens of ‘smoking guns’–literally and symbolically–that prove the cartel is in the weapons smuggling business. However, the cartel has more than just smoking guns.”

Martin’s  labeling of the weapons as ‘more than just smoking guns’ just may be the understatement of the year

“The El Paso Times reported that officials have discovered an array of military grade weapons, grenade and grenade launchers, high-powered rifles, body armor, anti-aircraft missiles, and night vision goggles,” writes Martin, “The nature of the weapons that have been discovered would seem to confirm suspicions that the cartel obtains these weapons from the U.S. Government.”

Martin quotes the El Paso Times:

“Jesús Rejón Aguilar, the number three man in the Zeta’s hierarchy, disclosed last week that the Zetas bought weapons in the United States and transported them across the Rio Grande. Mexican federal authorities captured Rejón on July 3 in the state of Mexico, and presented him to the news media the next day. His recorded video statement was uploaded on YouTube.

[Former CIA Agent Phil] Jordan agreed with Plumlee’s allegations that the Zetas are operating in the Columbus-Palomas border.

Plumlee, who has testified before U.S. congressional committees about arms and drug trafficking, said the roads in Southern New Mexico provide smugglers easy access to Mexico’s highway networks.

This is very strong evidence and brings the gun smuggling operations to an entirely new level as the military grade weapons are being used by the cartels to commit acts of terrorism in Mexico and inside the United States.
.

July 23, 2011 Posted by | Americas, Anti War, Covert Ops, Disinformation, World at War ( not the Game ) | , , , | Comments Off

The Dark Truth About 9/11 Emerges From The Fog of Infowar ……

http://www.infowars.com

THE EXCAVATOR
July 18, 2011

“I stand amid the roar
Of a surf-tormented shore,
And I hold within my hand
Grains of the golden sand–”

- Edgar Allan Poe, A Dream Within A Dream.

Once the summer ends, we will hear more talk about another world war as Israel’s delusional leaders begin to direct their brainwashed army towards Lebanon, Syria and Iran. Nuclear war is on the demented minds of Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Minister of Defense Ehud Barak. Peace was never an option for these two restless men whose minds are clouded by extreme hatred, and evil desires. They will do anything to stop a Palestinian state from coming into being, including starting world war three by bombing Iran.

A world war will destroy modern civilization as we know it. Many people know the world is already in a state of global emergency. Truth is outlawed in America and the West. Believers of freedom, justice and honour are laughed out of the room as “conspiracy theorists,” and “nutjobs.” But there are millions of us who know better and will not be deterred by these psychological attacks. We know the infowar is not for the weak minded. We are not stupid and we are not cowards.

We know who was really behind the 9/11 attacks. We know who is behind all this global chaos that has been visited upon a shell-shocked world since September 11, 2001. We know mankind is at the edge of the abyss. Our so-called democratic governments, media institutions, and political leaders have not only failed us; they have betrayed us.
The real perpetrators of the 9/11 attacks will pay for what they have done in the name of America, freedom and democracy. Believe it. Justice will be done. Real change is not a failed hope just because that two-faced traitor Barack Obama has not brought the criminals behind the 9/11 attacks and the war on terror to justice.

Evil is not the only force that is active in this world. Good people everywhere are standing up and raising their voices to call the world’s attention to the dark truth about 9/11. We will not be stopped. The truth about the 9/11 attacks is not a matter of debate. The facts show that Israel and American traitors inside America’s shadow national security state attacked America on September 11, 2001. They used the tragedy to unleash their mad dream: a quiet war on freedom and truth in the West, and a total war on regimes in the Middle East which have embraced the path of independence and self-reliance in defiance of U.S.-Israeli-British imperialism.

Alan Sabrosky, a Marine Corps Vietnam veteran and a 1986 graduate of the U.S. Army War College, is courageously raising public awareness about the truth of the 9/11 attacks. In an interview with Press TV on July 13, 2011, Mr. Sabrosky addressed the prejudiced notion that any alternative interpretation of the 9/11 attacks is simply a “conspiracy theory,” saying:

Back in the early 80s, when I was in Washington at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, one of our visitors for a lunch and talk was a young gentlemen then named Francois Heisbourg. Heisbourg was the specialist assistant to French President Francois Mitterrand. I don’t know how the subject came up, but he said, “you know, Americans never see conspiracies anywhere.” “We French,” he said, “we see conspiracies everywhere. And both of us are wrong.”

Sabrosky continued:

This is not a conspiracy (referring to the view that Israel and high-ranking U.S. officials did 9/11) in the sense that the word is usually used, which is to denigrate an opposing argument. When someone in the United States says that “that’s a conspiracy,” or, “that’s a conspiracy theory,” by definition they mean it is irrational, illegitimate, and without proof. All I would suggest to people is that you look at the films of WTC 7, that third tower going down on September 11; you look and listen to the reports on September 11 with the secondary explosions. These are not fantasies. They happened. You look at the reports on September 12 of the apprehension of Israelis with vans of explosives and cameras filming the events on September 11. These are not fantasies. And you look at the people riddling the American government, all of the Middle East people in State, Defense, and the National Security Council; Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz, Under Secretary of Defense for Policy Douglas Feith, who used to be a friend of mine, by the way, from Philadelphia. These people were all part of the neoconservative movement. Many of these people are dual U.S.-Israeli nationals. All of their primary allegiance is to Israel.

Alan Sabrosky is a real American patriot. Like many others, he is educating the American people in order to save America from the evil traitors who want to turn America into a full-fledged dictatorship.

The traitors who stabbed America in the back on 9/11 were in the Bush administration, and the Pentagon’s Office of Special Plans (George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Condoleezza Rice, Karl Rove, Paul Wolfowitz, Douglas Feith, Lawrence Franklin, Abram Shulsky, Michael Ledeen, Michael Chertoff, and many others).

The individuals who are part of the neocon cult worship the philosophers Leo Strauss and Machiavelli, and hate America’s founding fathers. They are the scum of the Earth and the greatest enemies of freedom in our time. If their evil plan for America and the Middle East is not exposed and defeated then there won’t be an America, or an Israel, or a Canada, or an England, or an Iran, or a Lebanon to speak of. Iraq and Afghanistan have already suffered at the hands of the neocon death cult. All nations that the neocons wish total war upon, including America, will experience hell on Earth if we don’t come together and send these psychopathic killers back to the hell they came from.

Video Links:
Alan Sabrosky’s Interview on Press TV on July 13, 2011
9/11: WTC Building 7 “Collapse” video compilation
Controlled Demolition Expert Danny Jowenko saying that WTC 7 was brought down by controlled demolition

.

July 19, 2011 Posted by | 9/11, Anti NWO, Anti War, Covert Ops, Disinformation, Middle East, New World Order, World at War ( not the Game ), World Politics | , , , , | Comments Off

Anonymous hit on US defense contractor ……………..

http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com  

Tuesday, July 12, 2011
.
ISTANBUL – From online dispatches
Hacker group Anonymous released a trove of military email addresses and passwords it claimed to have plundered from the network of US defense consulting firm Booz Allen Hamilton.
Anonymous' propaganda poster for Operation Egypt, its solidarity campaign in support of Egypt's street protests. Image courtesy of Anonymous
Anonymous’ propaganda poster for Operation Egypt, its solidarity campaign in support of Egypt’s street protests. Image courtesy of Anonymous

Anonymous, the international cyberactivist network, has announced the release of 90,000 military email logins which its members obtained in one of the biggest-ever hacking operations.

According to Al Jazeera, the group promised that the publication of the documents on several websites on Monday is only the first in a series of leaks intended to show the intelligence community’s vulnerability.

This round of emails comes from Booz Allen Hamilton, a management consultancy firm based in Virginia, United States.

Booz Allen Hamilton is active in the Middle East and North Africa, with its regional headquarters in the United Arab Emirates.

“With a multidisciplinary approach, Booz Allen provides robust cybersecurity solutions to a broad range of clients and industries, enabling them to confidently pursue the opportunities offered by the cyber revolution,” reads a statement on the company’s website.

The company on its Twitter feed it wrote: “As part of @BoozAllen security policy, we generally do not comment on specific threats or actions taken against our systems.”

A flurry of commentary around the operation began immediately on the microblogging site Twitter under the hashtag #MilitaryMeltdownMonday.

There were hints that other similar military or intelligence contractors may be next to catch attention in the emerging “Antisec” movement.

“ATTN Intelligence community: Your contractors have failed you. Tomorrow is the beginning,” an Anon known as Sabu wrote on Twitter under the handle of @anonymouSabu.

Sabu’s tweets, widely retweeted by other Anons, promised “two of the biggest releases for Anonymous in the last four years”.

Hours earlier, Anons breached the security of IRC Federal, an IT contractor that works for federal agencies in the US, including the FBI and NASA.

A representative at IRC Federal’s head office in West Virginia told the company had reported the incident to the authorities and had no further comment.

He said it was not clear why the firm, which employs less than 35 people, had been targeted.

A statement from Anonymous called on the firm’s employees to stop working for “corporations and a government which uses unethical means to corner vast amounts of wealth”.

“They [IRC] brag about their multi-million dollar partnership with the FBI, Army, Navy, NASA, and the Department of Justice, selling out their “skills” to the US empire. So we laid nuclear waste to their systems, owning their pathetic windows box, dropping their databases and private emails, and defaced their professional looking website,” the statement said.

The amorphous group is in constant evolution, though freedom of speech remains an underlying preoccupation.

It rushed to the defence of WikiLeaks, launching high-profile attacks against financial companies when they responded to governments’ requests to cut the whistle-blowing website’s income.

The latest operations come on the eve of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange’s appeal hearing against his extradition.

With its support for the Arab uprisings, it went from being largely based in Western countries to gaining popularity amongst like-minded activists in North Africa and the Middle East.

Gabriella Coleman, an anthropologist at NYU’s media department, said that Anonymous has “set the bar very high” in the buildup to this latest series of operations.

“If it is indeed a splash,” she said of this week’s operations, “I think it’ll be a defining moment.”

The hacking of Booz Allen Hamilton and IRC Federal had been conducted in what appeared to be a more open, inclusive manner than similar hacking activities in the past, she said.

“With every twist and turn, new possibilities have opened up.”

Anonymous’ regular online meeting place, the Anonops Internet Relay Chat (IRC), a secure form of online chat room, has been taken offline by “distributed denial of service” (DDoS) attacks carried out by an unknown group. The site, where Anons discuss their operations has been unavailable since Friday and was still unavailable at the time of writing.

In recent months, the movement has come under growing international pressure. Its members have been arrested in Spain, Italy and the United Kingdom, while in the US, its members have been targeted by subpoenas.

Yet, as Monday’s operation demonstrated, the Anons are growing bolder than ever. A defiant press release followed the crackdown in Italy, reiterating that the groups’ lack of leadership or structure made it impossible to dismantle.

“All Anonymous members operate at the same level. Those arrested are not ‘dangerous hackers’ as the media calls them, but people like you. They have been arrested while peacefully protesting for their and your rights. Our protest will continue louder than ever.”

.

July 12, 2011 Posted by | Covert Ops, Internet | , , , , , | Comments Off

Truckers Report Moving Military Equipment Across U.S, FEMA Involved!

The Intel Hub
Alex Thomas
June 20th, 2011

This is an alert to all truckers. We need your help to confirm this information. Send any tips to tips@theintelhub.com

In the last week, The Intel Hub has reported an extensive amount of military movements throughout the United States.

We now have reports that a huge movement of heavy artillery, tanks, rocket launchers ground to ground ground to air in and around Alexandria Virginia. The trucker reported that his friend was on a secret move and will being moving the stuff to update New York.

“This stuff is being distributed in areas to protect the population.”

One trucker reportedly went through the Mojave County and FEMA was everywhere.

“Prepare for a catastrophic event.”

While The Intel Hub has not independently confirmed this report it dose dovetail into recent reports that we have received in regards to suspicious military movements throughout the United States.

Theories to the reason for all the military movements that have been documented in the last week range from an October invasion of Libya, to earth changes, to literal martial law.

The only thing we know for sure is that suspicious military and possible foreign military troop movements have been confirmed and a buildup for something in on the horizon.

.

June 21, 2011 Posted by | Covert Ops | , | Leave a Comment

Iraq for Sale: The War Profiteers (Full Movie)

by grtv
Robert Greenwald

The story of what happens to everyday Americans when corporations go to war.

Acclaimed director Robert Greenwald (Wal-Mart: The High Cost of Low Price, Outfoxed) takes you inside the lives of soldiers, truck drivers, widows and children who have been changed forever as a result of profiteering in the reconstruction of Iraq. Iraq for Sale uncovers the connections between private corporations making a killing in Iraq (Blackwater, Halliburton/KBR, CACI and Titan) and the decision makers who allow them to do so.

Originally released in 2006.

June 4, 2011 Posted by | Anti War, Covert Ops, Gran Theft Economics, Middle East, World at War ( not the Game ) | , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment

Russia Says IMF Chief Jailed For Discovering All US Gold Is Gone

Posted by EU Times on May 31st, 2011

 

A new report prepared for Prime Minister Putin by the Federal Security Service (FSB) says that former International Monetary Fund (IMF) Chief Dominique Strauss-Kahn was charged and jailed in the US for sex crimes on May 14th after his discovery that all of the gold held in the United States Bullion Depository located at Fort Knox was ‘missing and/or unaccounted’ for.

According to this FSB secret report, Strauss-Kahn had become “increasingly concerned” earlier this month after the United States began “stalling” its pledged delivery to the IMF of 191.3 tons of gold agreed to under the Second Amendment of the Articles of Agreement signed by the Executive Board in April 1978 that were to be sold to fund what are called Special Drawing Rights (SDRs) as an alternative to what are called reserve currencies.

This FSB report further states that upon Strauss-Kahn raising his concerns with American government officials close to President Obama he was ‘contacted’ by ‘rogue elements’ within the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) who provided him ‘firm evidence’ that all of the gold reported to be held by the US ‘was gone’.

Upon Strauss-Kahn receiving the CIA evidence, this report continues, he made immediate arrangements to leave the US for Paris, but when contacted by agents working for France’s General Directorate for External Security (DGSE) that American authorities were seeking his capture he fled to New York City’s JFK airport following these agents directive not to take his cell-phone because US police could track his exact location.

Once Strauss-Kahn was safely boarded on an Air France flight to Paris, however, this FSB report says he made a ‘fatal mistake’ by calling the hotel from a phone on the plane and asking them to forwarded the cell-phone he had been told to leave behind to his French residence, after which US agents were able to track and apprehend him.

Within the past fortnight, this report continues, Strauss-Kahn reached out to his close friend and top Egyptian banker Mahmoud Abdel Salam Omar to retrieve from the US the evidence given to him by the CIA. Omar, however, and exactly like Strauss-Kahn before him, was charged yesterday by the US with a sex crime against a luxury hotel maid, a charge the FSB labels as ‘beyond belief’ due to Omar being 74-years-old and a devout Muslim.

In an astounding move puzzling many in Moscow, Putin after reading this secret FSB report today ordered posted to the Kremlin’s official website a defense of Strauss-Khan becoming the first world leader to state that the former IMF chief was a victim of a US conspiracy. Putin further stated, “It’s hard for me to evaluate the hidden political motives but I cannot believe that it looks the way it was initially introduced. It doesn’t sit right in my head.”

Interesting to note about all of these events is that one of the United States top Congressman, and 2012 Presidential candidate, Ron Paul [photo bottom left] has long stated his belief that the US government has lied about its gold reserves held at Fort Knox. So concerned had Congressman Paul become about the US government and the Federal Reserve hiding the truth about American gold reserves he put forward a bill in late 2010 to force an audit of them, but which was subsequently defeated by Obama regime forces.

When directly asked by reporters if he believed there was no gold in Fort Knox or the Federal Reserve, Congressman Paul gave the incredible reply, “I think it is a possibility.”

Also interesting to note is that barely 3 days after the arrest of Strauss-Kahn, Congressman Paul made a new call for the US to sell its gold reserves by stating, “Given the high price it is now, and the tremendous debt problem we now have, by all means, sell at the peak.”

Bizarre reports emanating from the US for years, however, suggest there is no gold to sell, and as we can read as posted in 2009 on the ViewZone.Com news site:

“In October of 2009 the Chinese received a shipment of gold bars. Gold is regularly exchanges between countries to pay debts and to settle the so-called balance of trade. Most gold is exchanged and stored in vaults under the supervision of a special organization based in London, the London Bullion Market Association (or LBMA). When the shipment was received, the Chinese government asked that special tests be performed to guarantee the purity and weight of the gold bars. In this test, four small holed are drilled into the gold bars and the metal is then analyzed.

Officials were shocked to learn that the bars were fake. They contained cores of tungsten with only a outer coating of real gold. What’s more, these gold bars, containing serial numbers for tracking, originated in the US and had been stored in Fort Knox for years. There were reportedly between 5,600 to 5,700 bars, weighing 400 oz. each, in the shipment!”

To the final fate of Strauss-Kahn it is not in our knowing, but new reports coming from the United States show his determination not to go down without a fight as he has hired what is described as a ‘crack team’ of former CIA spies, private investigators and media advisers to defend him.

To the practical effects on the global economy should it be proved that the US, indeed, has been lying about its gold reserves, Russia’s Central Bank yesterday ordered the interest rate raised from 0.25 to 3.5 percent and Putin ordered the export ban on wheat and grain crops lifted by July 1st in a move designed to fill the Motherlands coffers with money that normally would have flowed to the US.

The American peoples ability to know the truth of these things, and as always, has been shouted out by their propaganda media organs leaving them in danger of not being prepared for the horrific economic collapse of their nation now believed will much sooner than later.

Source

.

May 31, 2011 Posted by | Covert Ops, Gran Theft Economics | , , , , | Leave a Comment

Once NATO enemies in Iraq and Afghanistan, now NATO allies in Libya

http://www.voltairenet.org

The recycling of Bin Laden’s men

by Webster G. Tarpley*

Drawing on the West Point Military Academy’s analysis of records seized in the Islamic Emirate of Iraq, U.S. historian and journalist Webster G. Tarpley demonstrates that the Libyan National Transitional Council is largely made up of elements affiliated with Al-Qaeda. In the context of a vast reorganization of its secret operations, the United States is enlisting in Libya – and in Syria – the jihadists that it is tracking down in Iraq and Afghanistan. “Bin Laden is dead! Long live the Bin Ladenists”, cynics in Washington could well be proclaiming.



24 May 2011

From
Washington D.C. (USA)

All the versions of this article:

 français


Serpents, thirst, heat, and sand … Libya alone can present a multitude of woes that it would beseem men to fly from.”
Lucan, Pharsalia

The current military attack on Libya has been motivated by UN Security Council resolution 1973 with the need to protect civilians. Statements by President Obama, British Prime Minister Cameron, French President Sarkozy, and other leaders have stressed the humanitarian nature of the intervention, which is said to aim at preventing a massacre of pro-democracy forces and human rights advocates by the Qaddafi regime.

But at the same time, many commentators have voiced anxiety because of the mystery which surrounds the anti-Qaddafi transitional government which emerged at the beginning of March in the city of Benghazi, located in the Cyrenaica district of north-eastern Libya. This government has already been recognized by France and Portugal as the sole legitimate representative of the Libyan people. The rebel council seems to be composed of just over 30 delegates, many of whom are enveloped in obscurity. In addition, the names of more than a dozen members of the rebel council are being kept secret, allegedly to protect them from the vengeance of Qaddafi. But there may be other reasons for the anonymity of these figures. Despite much uncertainty, the United Nations and its several key NATO countries, including the United States, have rushed forward to assist the armed forces of this rebel regime with air strikes, leading to the loss of one or two coalition aircraft and the prospect of heavier losses to come, especially if there should be an invasion. It is high time that American and European publics learned something more about this rebel regime which is supposed to represent a democratic and humanitarian alternative to Gaddafi.

The rebels are clearly not civilians, but an armed force. What kind of an armed force?

Since many of the rebel leaders are so difficult to research from afar, and since a sociological profile of the rebels cannot be done on the ground in the midst of warfare, perhaps the typical methods of social history can be called on for help. Is there a way for us to gain deeper insight into the climate of opinion which prevails in such northeastern Libyan cities as Benghazi, Tobruk, and Darnah, the main population centers of the rebellion?

It turns out that there is, in the form of a December 2007 West Point study examining the background of foreign guerrilla fighters — jihadis or mujahedin, including suicide bombers — crossing the Syrian border into Iraq during the 2006-2007 timeframe, under the auspices of the international terrorist organization Al Qaeda. This study is based on a mass of about 600 Al Qaeda personnel files which were captured by US forces in the fall of 2007, and analyzed at West Point using a methodology which we will discuss after having presented the main findings. The resulting study [1] permits us to make important findings about the mentality and belief structures of the northeastern Libyan population that is furnishing the basis for the rebellion, permitting important conclusions about the political nature of the anti-Qaddafi revolt in these areas.

Darnah, northeast Libya: World Capital of Jihadis

The most striking finding which emerges from the West Point study is that the corridor which goes from Benghazi to Tobruk, passing through the city of Darnah (also transliterated as Derna) them represents one of the greatest concentrations of jihadi terrorists to be found anywhere in the world, and by some measures can be regarded as the leading source of suicide bombers anywhere on the planet. Darnah, with one terrorist fighter sent into Iraq to kill Americans for every 1,000 to 1,500 persons of population, emerges as suicide bomber heaven, easily surpassing the closest competitor, which was Riyad, Saudi Arabia.

According to West Point authors Joseph Felter and Brian Fishman, Saudi Arabia took first place as regards absolute numbers of jihadis sent to combat the United States and other coalition members in Iraq during the time frame in question. Libya, a country less than one fourth as populous, took second place. Saudi Arabia sent 41% of the fighters. According to Felter and Fishman, “Libya was the next most common country of origin, with 18.8% (112) of the fighters listing their nationality stating they hailed from Libya.” Other much larger countries were far behind: “Syria, Yemen, and Algeria were the next most common origin countries with 8.2% (49), 8.1% (48), and 7.2% (43), respectively. Moroccans accounted for 6.1% (36) of the records and Jordanians 1.9% (11).” [2]

This means that almost one fifth of the foreign fighters entering Iraq across the Syrian border came from Libya, a country of just over 6 million people. A higher proportion of Libyans were interested in fighting in Iraq than any other country contributing mujahedin. Felter and Fishman point out: “Almost 19 percent of the fighters in the Sinjar Records came from Libya alone. Furthermore, Libya contributed far more fighters per capita than any other nationality in the Sinjar Records, including Saudi Arabia.” [3]

But since the Al Qaeda personnel files contain the residence or hometown of the foreign fighters in question, we can determine that the desire to travel to Iraq to kill Americans was not evenly distributed across Libya, but was highly concentrated precisely in those areas around Benghazi which are today the epicenters of the revolt against Colonel Gaddafi which the US, Britain, France, and others are so eagerly supporting.

As Daya Gamage of the Asia Tribune comments in a recent article on the West Point study, “…alarmingly for Western policymakers, most of the fighters came from eastern Libya, the center of the current uprising against Muammar el-Qaddafi. The eastern Libyan city of Darnah sent more fighters to Iraq than any other single city or town, according to the West Point report. It noted that 52 militants came to Iraq from Darnah, a city of just 80,000 people (the second-largest source of fighters was Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, which has a population of more than 4 million). Benghazi, the capital of Libya’s provisional government declared by the anti-Qaddafi rebels, sent in 21 fighters, again a disproportionate number of the whole.” [4] Obscure Darnah edged out metropolitan Riyadh by 52 fighters to 51. Qaddafi’s stronghold of Tripoli, by contrast, barely shows up in the statistics at all.

What explains this extraordinary concentration of anti-American fighters in Benghazi and Darnah? The answer seems related to extremist schools of theology and politics which flourished in these areas. As the West Point report notes: “Both Darnah and Benghazi have long been associated with Islamic militancy in Libya.” These areas are in theological and tribal conflict with the central government of Colonel Gaddafi, in addition to being politically opposed to him. Whether such a theological conflict is worth the deaths of still more American and European soldiers is a question which needs urgently to be answered.

Felter and Fishman remark that “The vast majority of Libyan fighters that included their hometown in the Sinjar Records resided in the country’s northeast, particularly the coastal cities of Darnah 60.2% (52) and Benghazi 23.9% (21). Both Darnah and Benghazi have long been associated with Islamic militancy in Libya, in particular for an uprising by Islamist organizations in the mid-1990s. The Libyan government blamed the uprising on ‘infiltrators from the Sudan and Egypt’ and one group—the Libyan Fighting Group (jama-ah al-libiyah al-muqatilah)—claimed to have Afghan veterans in its ranks. The Libyan uprisings became extraordinarily violent.” [5]

Northeastern Libya: Highest Density of Suicide Bombers

Another remarkable feature of the Libyan contribution to the war against US forces inside Iraq is the marked propensity of the northeastern Libyans to choose the role of suicide bomber as their preferred method of struggle. As the West Point study states, “Of the 112 Libyans in the Records, 54.4% (61) listed their ‘work.’ Fully 85.2% (51) of these Libyan fighters listed “suicide bomber” as their work in Iraq.” [6] This means that the northeastern Libyans were far more apt to choose the role of suicide bomber than those from any other country: “Libyan fighters were much more likely than other nationalities to be listed as suicide bombers (85% for Libyans, 56% for all others).” [7]

The anti-Qaddafi Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) Merges with al Qaeda, 2007

The specific institutional basis for the recruitment of guerrilla fighters in northeastern Libya is associated with an organization which previously called itself the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG). During the course of 2007, the LIFG declared itself an official subsidiary of al Qaeda, later assuming the name of Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM). As a result of this 2007 merger, an increased number of guerrilla fighters arrived in Iraq from Libya. According to Felter and Fishman, “The apparent surge in Libyan recruits traveling to Iraq may be linked the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group’s (LIFG) increasingly cooperative relationship with al-Qaeda, which culminated in the LIFG officially joining al-Qaeda on November 3, 2007.” [8] This merger is confirmed by other sources: A 2008 statement attributed to Ayman al-Zawahiri claimed that the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group has joined al-Qaeda. [9]

Terrorist “Emir” Touts Key Role of Benghazi, Darnah in al Qaeda

The West Point study makes clear that the main bulwarks of the LIFG and of the later AQIM were the twin cities of Benghazi and Darnah. This is documented in a statement by Abu Layth al-Libi, the self-styled “Emir” of the LIFG, who later became a top official of al Qaeda. At the time of the 2007 merger, “Abu Layth al-Libi, LIFG’s Emir, reinforced Benghazi and Darnah’s importance to Libyan jihadis in his announcement that LIFG had joined al-Qa’ida, saying: ‘It is with the grace of God that we were hoisting the banner of jihad against this apostate regime under the leadership of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, which sacrificed the elite of its sons and commanders in combating this regime whose blood was spilled on the mountains of Darnah, the streets of Benghazi, the outskirts of Tripoli, the desert of Sabha, and the sands of the beach.’” [10]

JPEG - 16.5 kb
Ammar Ashoor al-Rufaie, aka “Abu Laith al-Libi” (the Libyan), (1967-2008) took part as a teenager in the anti-Soviet struggle in Afghanistan, under the authority of Osama Bin Laden and the CIA. During the 1990’s he commanded the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group and was made Ayman al-Zawahiri’s assistant. He was involved in a failed Al-Qaeda attempt to oust Muammar Gaddafi. A British counter-intelligence agent, David Shayler, subsequently revealed that the operation had been ordered by Her Majesty’s services. Abu Laith “the Libyan” is said to have organized the suicide bombing of the U.S. Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan on 27 February 2007 during the visit of Vice-President Cheney. A 5 million dollar price tag was put on his head. He was eventually taken out by the CIA drone in early 2008.

This 2007 merger meant that the Libyan recruits for Al Qaeda became an increasingly important part of the activity of this organization as a whole, shifting the center of gravity to some degree away from the Saudis and Egyptians who had previously been most conspicuous. As Felter and Fishman comment, “Libyan factions (primarily the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group) are increasingly important in al-Qa’ida. The Sinjar Records offer some evidence that Libyans began surging into Iraq in larger numbers beginning in May 2007. Most of the Libyan recruits came from cities in northeast Libya, an area long known for jihadi-linked militancy.” [11]

The December 2007 West Point study concludes by formulating some policy options for the United States government. One approach, the authors suggest, would be for the United States to cooperate with existing Arab governments against the terrorists. As Felter and Fishman write, “The Syrian and Libyan governments share the United States’ concerns about violent salafi-jihadi ideology and the violence perpetrated by its adherents. These governments, like others in the Middle East, fear violence inside their borders and would much rather radical elements go to Iraq rather than cause unrest at home. U.S. and Coalition efforts to stem the flow of fighters into Iraq will be enhanced if they address the entire logistical chain that supports the movement of these individuals—beginning in their home countries — rather than just their Syrian entry points. The U.S. may be able to increase cooperation from governments to stem the flow of fighters into Iraq by addressing their concerns about domestic jihadi violence.” [12] Given the course of subsequent events, we are on firm ground in concluding that this option was not the one selected, neither in the closing years of the Bush administration nor during the first half of the Obama administration.

The West Point study also offers another, more sinister perspective. Felter and Fishman hint that it might be possible to use the former LIFG components of Al Qaeda against the government of Colonel Qaddafi in Libya, in essence creating a de facto alliance between the United States and a segment of the terrorist organization. The West Point report notes: “The Libyan Islamic Fighting Group’s unification with al-Qa’ida and its apparent decision to prioritize providing logistical support to the Islamic State of Iraq is likely controversial within the organization. It is likely that some LIFG factions still want to prioritize the fight against the Libyan regime, rather than the fight in Iraq. It may be possible to exacerbate schisms within LIFG, and between LIFG’s leaders and al-Qa’ida’s traditional Egyptian and Saudi power-base.” [13] This suggests the US policy we see today, that of allying with the obscurantist and reactionary al Qaeda fanatics in Libya against the Nasserist modernizer Qaddafi.

Arming the Rebels: The Experience of Afghanistan

Looking back at the tragic experience of US efforts to incite the population of Afghanistan against the Soviet occupation in the years after 1979, it should be clear that the policy of the Reagan White House to arm the Afghan mujahedin with Stinger missiles and other modern weapons turned out to be highly destructive for the United States. As current Defense Secretary Robert Gates comes close to admitting in his memoirs, Al Qaeda was created during those years by the United States as a form of Arab Legion against the Soviet presence, with long-term results which have been highly lamented.

Today, it is clear that the United States is providing modern weapons for the Libyan rebels through Saudi Arabia and across the Egyptian border with the active assistance of the Egyptian army and of the newly installed pro-US Egyptian military junta. [14] This is a direct violation of UN Security Council resolution 1973, which calls for a complete arms embargo on Libya. The assumption is that these weapons will be used against Gaddafi in the coming weeks. But, given the violently anti-American nature of the population of northeast Libya that is now being armed, there is no certainty that these weapons will not be soon turned against those who have provided them.

A broader problem is represented by the conduct of the future Libyan government dominated by the current rebel council with its large current majority of northeastern Islamists, or of a similar government of a future Cyrenaica rump state. To the extent that such regimes will have access to oil revenues, obvious problems of international security are posed. Gamage wonders: “If the rebellion succeeds in toppling the Qaddafi regime it will have direct access to the tens of billions of dollars that Qaddafi is believed to have squirreled away in overseas accounts during his four-decade rule.” [15] Given the northeast Libyan mentality, we can imagine what such revenues might be used for.

What is al Qaeda and Why the CIA Has Used It

Al Qaeda is not a centralized organization, but rather a gaggle or congeries of fanatics, dupes, psychotics, misfits, double agents, provocateurs, mercenaries, and other elements. As noted, Al Qaeda was founded by the United States and the British during the struggle against the Soviets in Afghanistan. Many of its leaders, such as the reputed second-in-command Ayman Zawahiri and the current rising star Anwar Awlaki, are evidently double agents of MI-6 and/or the CIA. The basic belief structure of Al Qaeda is that all existing Arab and Moslem governments are illegitimate and should be destroyed, because they do not represent the caliphate which Al Qaeda asserts is described by the Koran. This means that the Al Qaeda ideology offers a ready and easy way for the Anglo-American secret intelligence agencies to attack and destabilize existing Arab and Muslim governments as part of the ceaseless need of imperialism and colonialism to loot and attack the developing nations. This is precisely what is happening in Libya today.

Al Qaeda emerged from the cultural and political milieu of the Moslem Brotherhood or Ikhwan, itself a creation of British intelligence in Egypt in the late 1920s. The US and the British used the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood to oppose the successful anti-imperialist policies of Egyptian President Nasser, who scored immense victories for his country by nationalizing the Suez Canal and building the Aswan High Dam, without which modern Egypt would be simply unthinkable. The Muslim brotherhood provided an active and capable fifth column of foreign agents against Nasser, in the same way that the official website of Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb is trumpeting its support for the rebellion against Colonel Qaddafi.

I have discussed the nature of Al Qaeda at some length in my recent book entitled 9/11 Synthetic Terrorism: Made in USA, and that analysis cannot be repeated here. It is enough to say that we do not need to believe in all the fantastic mythology which the United States government has spun around the name of Al Qaeda in order to recognize the basic fact that militants or patsies who spontaneously join al Qaeda are often sincerely motivated by a deep hatred of the United States and a burning desire to kill Americans, as well as Europeans. The Bush administration policy used the alleged presence of Al Qaeda as a pretext for direct military attacks on Afghanistan and Iraq. The Obama administration is now doing something different, intervening on the side of a rebellion in which Al Qaeda and its co-thinkers are heavily represented while attacking the secular authoritarian government of Colonel Gaddafi. Both of these policies are bankrupt and must be abandoned.

Rebel Leaders Jalil and Younis, Plus Most of Rebel Council are Members of the al Qaeda-linked Harabi Tribe

The result of the present inquiry is that the Libyan branch of Al Qaeda represents a continuum with the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group centered in Darnah and Benghazi. The ethnic base of the Libyan Islamic fighting group is apparently to be found in the anti-Qaddafi Harabi tribe, the tribe which makes up the vast majority of the rebel council including the two dominant rebel leaders, Abdul Fatah Younis and Mustafa Abdul Jalil. The evidence thus suggests that the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, the elite of the Harabi tribe, and the rebel council supported by Obama all overlap for all practical purposes. As the late Foreign Minister of Guyana Fred Wills, a real fighter against imperialism and neo-colonialism, taught me many years ago, political formations in developing countries (and not just there) are often a mask for ethnic and religious rivalries; so it is in Libya. The rebellion against Qaddafi is a toxic brew compounded of fanatical hatred of Qaddafi, Islamism, tribalism, and localism. From this point of view, Obama has foolishly chosen to take sides in a tribal war.

When Hillary Clinton went to Paris to be introduced to the Libyan rebels by French President Sarkozy, she met the US-educated Libyan opposition leader Mahmoud Jibril, already known to readers of Wikileaks document dumps as a favorite of the US.

While Jibril might be considered presentable in Paris, the real leaders of the Libyan insurrection would appear to be Jalil and Younis, both former ministers under Qaddafi. Jalil seems to be the primus inter pares, at least for the moment: “Mustafa Abdul Jalil or Abdul-Jalil (Arabic: مصطفى عبد الجليل, also transcribed Abdul-Jelil, Abd-al-Jalil, Abdel-Jalil or Abdeljalil; and frequently but erroneously as Abud Al Jeleil) (born 1952) is a Libyan politician. He was the Minister of Justice (unofficially, the Secretary of the General People’s Committee) under Colonel Muammar al-Gaddafi…. Abdul Jalil has been identified as the Chairman of the National Transitional Council based in Benghazi… although this position is contested by others in the uprising due to his past connections to Gaddafi’s regime.”

As for Younis, he has been closely associated with Qaddafi since the 1968-9 seizure of power: “Abdul Fatah Younis (Arabic: عبد الفتاح يونس) is a senior military officer in Libya. He held the rank of General and the post of Minister of Interior, but resigned on 22 February 2011….”

What should concern us most is that both Jalil and Younis come from the Haribi tribe, the dominant one in northeast Libya, and the one that overlaps with al Qaeda. According to Stratfor, the “…Harabi tribe is a historically powerful umbrella tribe in eastern Libya that saw their influence wane under Col. Gadhafi. The Libyan leader confiscated swaths of tribal members’ land and redistributed it to weaker and more loyal tribes…. Many of the leaders now emerging in eastern Libya hail from the Harabi tribe, including the head of the provisional government set up in Benghazi, Abdel Mustafa Jalil, and Abdel Fatah Younis, who assumed a key leadership role over the defected military ranks early in the uprising.” [16] This is like a presidential ticket where both candidates are from the same state, except that Libya’s ferocious tribal rivalries make the problem infinitely worse.

The Rebel Council: Half the Names Are Kept Secret; Why?

This picture of a narrow, sectarian tribal and regional base does not improve when we look at the rebel council as a whole. According to one recent version, the rebel council is “chaired by the well-spoken former justice minister for Libya, Mustafa Abdul Jalil, [and] consists of 31 members, ostensibly representatives from across Libya, of whom many cannot be named for “security reasons”…. “The key players on the council, at least those who we know about, all hail from the north-eastern Harabi confederation of tribes. These tribes have strong affiliations with Benghazi that date back to before the 1969 revolution which brought Gaddafi to power.” [17] Other accounts agree about the number of representatives: “The council has 31 members; the identities of several members has not been made public to protect their own safety.” Given what we know about the extraordinary density of LIFG and all Qaeda fanatics in northeast Libya, we are authorized to wonder as to whether so many members of the council are being kept secret in order to protect them from Qaddafi, or whether the goal is to prevent them from being recognized in the west as al Qaeda terrorists or sympathizers. The latter seems to be a more accurate summary of the real state of affairs.

Names released so far include: Mustafa Abduljaleel; Ashour Hamed Bourashed of Darna city; Othman Suleiman El-Megyrahi of the Batnan area; Al Butnan of the Egypt border and Tobruk; Ahmed Abduraba Al-Abaar of Benghazi city; Fathi Mohamed Baja of Benghazi city; Abdelhafed Abdelkader Ghoga of Benghazi city; Mr. Omar El-Hariri for Military Affairs; and Dr. Mahmoud Jibril, Ibrahim El-Werfali and Dr. Ali Aziz Al-Eisawi for foreign affairs. [18]

The State Department needs to interrogate these figures, starting perhaps with Ashour Hamed Bourashed, the delegate from the terrorist and suicide bomber stronghold of Darnah.

How Many al Qaeda Members, Veterans, or Sympathizers are on the Rebel Council?

Seeing as clearly as we can in the fog of war, it looks like slightly more than a dozen of the members of the rebel council have had their names officially published — in any case, not more than half of the reported 31 members. The US and European media have not taken the lead in identifying for us the names that are now known, and they above all have not called attention to the majority of the rebel council who are still lurking in the shadows of total secrecy. We must therefore demand to know how many LIFG and/or al Qaeda members, veterans, or sympathizers currently hold seats on the rebel council.

We are thus witnessing an attempt by the Harabi tribe to seize dominance over the 140 tribes of Libya. The Harabi are already practically hegemonic among the tribes of Cyrenaica. At the center of the Harabi Confederation is the Obeidat tribe, which is divided into 15 sub-tribes. [19] All of this might be of purely academic ethnographic interest, were it not for the fact of the striking overlap between the Harabi tribe and the LIFG and al Qaeda.

The Senussi Movement of Libya — Monarchist Democracy?

The political-religious tradition of northeast Libya makes this area such fertile ground for the more extreme Muslim sects and also predisposes it to monarchism rather than to the more modern forms of government favored by Qaddafi. The relevant regional tradition is that of the Senussi or Sanussi order, an anti-western Moslem sect. In Libya the Senussi order is closely associated with monarchism, since King Idris I, the ruler installed by the British in 1951 who was overthrown by Gaddafi in 1969, was also the leader of the Senussi order. The Senussi directed the rebellion against Italian colonialism in the person of Marshal Rodolfo Graziani and his army in the 1930s. Today, the rebels use the monarchist flag, and may advocate the return to the throne of one of the two pretenders to the Idris line. They are far closer to monarchism than to democracy

King Idris, Revered by the Libyan Rebels of Today

Here is the Stratfor view of King Idris and the Senussi: “King Idris came from a line of rulers of the Sanussi order, a Sufi religious order founded in 1842 in Al Bayda, that practices a conservative and austere form of Islam. The Sanussiyah represented a political force in Cyrenaica that preceded the creation of the modern state of Libya, and whose reverberations continue to be felt to this day. It is no coincidence that this region is the home of Libyan jihadism, with groups like the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG). The Gadhafi family has thus been calling the current uprising an elaborate Islamist plot….” [20] Under the monarchy, Libya was by some estimates absolutely the poorest country in the world. Today, Libya ranks 53 on the UN Human Development Index and qualifies as the most developed country in Africa, ahead of Russia, Brazil, Ukraine, and Venezuela. Qaddafi’s stewardship has objective merits which cannot be seriously denied.

Glen Ford’s Black Agenda Report has correctly sought to show the racist and reactionary character of the Libyan insurrection. The tribes of southern Libya, known as the Fezzan, are dark skinned. The tribal underpinning of the Gaddafi regime has been an alliance of the tribes of the West, the center, and the southern Fezzan, against the Harabi and the Obeidat, who identify with the former monarchist ruling class. The Harabi and Obeidat are known to nurture a deep racist hatred against the Fezzan. This was expressed in frequent news reports from the pro-imperialist media at the beginning of the rebellion evidently inspired by Harabi accounts, according to which black people in Libya had to be treated as mercenaries working for Gaddafi — with the clear implication that they were to be exterminated. These racist inventions are still being repeated by quackademics like Dean Slaughter of the Woodrow Wilson School at Princeton. And in fact, large numbers of black Africans from Chad and other countries working in Libyan have been systematically lynched and massacred by the anti-Gaddafi forces. The Obama White House, for all its empty talk of not wanting to repeat the massacre in Rwanda, has conveniently ignored this shocking story of real genocide at the hands of its new racist friends in Cyrenaica.

Against the obscurantism of the Senussi, Qaddafi has advanced the Moslem equivalent of the priesthood of all believers, arguing that no caliphate is necessary in order to discover the meaning of the Koran. He has supplemented this with a pan African perspective. Gerald A. Perreira of the Black Agenda Report writes the following about the theological division between Gaddafi and the neo-Senussi of northeast Libya, as well as other obscuranitsts: “Al Qaeda is in the Sahara on his borders and the International Union of Muslim Scholars is calling for [Qaddafi] to be tried in a court…. [Qaddafi] has questioned the Islam of the Muslim Brotherhood and Al Qaeda from a Quranic/theological perspective and is one of the few political leaders equipped to do so…. Benghazi has always been at the heart of counter-revolution in Libya, fostering reactionary Islamic movements such as the Wahhabis and Salafists. It is these people who founded the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group based in Benghazi which allies itself with Al Qaeda and who have, over the years, been responsible for the assassination of leading members of the Libyan revolutionary committees.” [21] And what would be for example the status of women under the neo-Senussi of the Benghazi rebel council?

Al Qaeda from Demon to US ally in Libya

For those who attempt to follow the ins and outs of the CIA’s management of its various patsy organizations inside the realm of presumed Islamic terrorism, it may be useful to trace the transformation of the LIFG-AQIM from deadly enemy to close ally. This phenomenon is closely linked to the general reversal of the ideological fronts of US imperialism that marks the divide between the Bush-Cheney-neocon administrations and the current Obama-Brzezinski-International Crisis Group regime. The Bush approach was to use the alleged presence of Al Qaeda as a reason for direct military attack. The Obama method is to use Al Qaeda to overthrow independent governments, and then either Balkanize and partition the countries in question, or else use them as kamikaze puppets against larger enemies like Russia, China, or Iran. This approach implies a more or less open fraternization with terrorist groups, which was signaled in a general way in Obamas famous Cairo speech of 2009. The links of the Obama campaign to the terrorist organizations deployed by the CIA against Russia were already a matter of public record three years ago. [22]

JPEG - 20.3 kb
In its 11 June 2008 edition, the New Republic attuned public opinion to the possible recycling of Bin Laden’s men.

But such a reversal of field cannot be improvised overnight; it took several years of preparation. On July 10, 2009, The London Daily Telegraph reported that the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group had split with Al Qaeda. This was when the United States had decided to de-emphasize the Iraq war, and also to prepare to use the Sunni Moslem Brotherhood and its Sunni Al Qaeda offshoot for the destabilization of the leading Arab states preparatory to turning them against Shiite Iran. Paul Cruikshank wrote at that time in the New York Daily News about one top LIFG honcho who wanted to dial back the relation to al Qaeda and the infamous Osama Bin Laden; this was “Noman Benotman, a former leader of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group. While mainstream Muslim leaders have long criticized Al Qaeda, these critics have the jihadist credentials to make their criticisms bite.” [23] But by this time some LIFG bosses had moved up into al Qaeda: the London Daily Telegraph reported that senior Al Qaeda members Abu Yahya al-Libi and Abu Laith al-Libi were LIFG members. Around this time, Qaddafi released some LIFG fighters in an ill-advsided humanitarian gesture.

Northeast Libyan Jihadis Killing US, NATO Forces in Afghanistan Right Now

One of the fatal contradictions in the current State Department and CIA policy is that it aims at a cordial alliance with Al Qaeda killers in northeast Libya, at the very moment when the United States and NATO are mercilessly bombing the civilian northwest Pakistan in the name of a total war against Al Qaeda, and US and NATO forces are being killed by Al Qaeda guerrillas in that same Afghanistan-Pakistan theater of war. The force of this glaring contradiction causes the entire edifice of US war propaganda to collapse. The US has long since lost any basis in morality for military force.

In fact, terrorist fighters from northeast Libya may be killing US and NATO troops in Afghanistan right now, even as the US and NATO protect their home base from the Qaddafi government. According to this account, a top Al Qaeda commander in northwest Pakistan was killed by US action as recently as October 2010: “A senior al Qaeda leader who serves as al Qaeda’s ambassador to Iran, and is wanted by the US, is reported to have been killed in a Predator air strike in Pakistan’s Taliban-controlled tribal agency of North Waziristan two days ago…. [This was] Atiyah Abd al Rahman, a Libyan national who has been based in Iran and served as Osama bin Laden’s ambassador to the mullahs. Unconfirmed press reports indicate that Rahman was killed in an airstrike….” [24] The US State Department’s Rewards for Justice page for Atiyah Abd al Rahman notes that he was al Qaeda’s “emissary in Iran as appointed by Osama bin Ladin.” Atiyah “recruited and facilitated talks with other Islamic groups to operate under” al Qaeda and was “also a member of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group and Ansar al Sunna.” [25] Rahman was ranked high enough in al Qaeda to be able to give orders to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the head of al Qeada in Iraq, in 2005.

Also killed in Pakistan was another apparent northeast Libyan going by the name of Khalid al Harabi, whose choice of a nom de guerre may well link him to the jihadi farm among the Harabi tribe in Cyrenaica. According to one account, “Khalid al Harabi is an alias for Khalid Habib, al Qaeda’s former military commander who was killed in a US Predator strike in October 2008.” [26]

The Scenario Uncovered by the 1995 Shayler Affair is Operative Today

In 1995, David Shayler, an official of the British counterintelligence organization MI-5, became aware that his counterpart at the British foreign espionage organization MI-6 had paid the sum of £100,000 to an Al Qaeda affiliate in exchange for the attempt to assassinate Qaddafi. The assassination attempt did occur, and killed several innocent bystanders, but failed to eliminate the Libyan ruler. As Shayler understood the MI-6 scenario, it included the liquidation of Gaddafi, followed by the descent of Libya into chaos and tribal warfare, with a possible option for a direct seizure of power by al Qaeda itself. This situation would then provide a pretext for Britain, probably but not necessarily acting together with the United States or other countries, to invade Libya and seize control of the oil fields, probably establishing a permanent protectorate over the oil regions, the pipelines, and the coast. [27] This remains the goal today.

Timed to coincide with the attempt to assassinate Qaddafi, MI-6 and other Western secret intelligence agencies fomented a considerable insurrection in northeast Libya, almost precisely in the same areas which are in rebellion today. Its insurrection was successfully crushed by Qaddafi’s forces by the end of 1996. The events of 2011 are simply a reprise of the imperialist attack on Libya 15 years ago, with the addition of outside intervention..

David Shayler’s testimony at the Axis for Peace Conference organized by Voltaire Network in 2005.

The War Against the Nation State

Today’s attack on Libya comes in the context of a broad attack on the institution of the sovereign nation state itself, as it has existed since the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648. The United States and the British are deeply concerned by the large number of nations which are seeking to escape from Anglo-American hegemony by actively pursuing large-scale cooperation with Russia on security, with China on economic questions, and with Iran for geopolitical considerations. The CIA/MI-6 response has been a wild orgy of destabilizations, people power coups, color revolutions, and palace putsches, signaled by the document dumps by the CIA limited hangout operation known as Wikileaks, which has targeted names of the CIA hit mist from Ben Ali to Qaddafi. The Obama strategy would have preferred an exclusive reliance and the illusion that the Arab Spring was really a matter of youthful visionary idealists gathering in the public square to praise democracy, the rule of law, and human rights. This was never the reality: the actual decisions were being made by brutal cliques of generals and top officials bribed or blackmailed by the CIA who were moving behind the scenes to oust such figures as Ben Ali or Mubarak. Whatever else Qaddafi has done, he has undoubtedly forced the CIA and NATO to drop the pleasant mask of youthful idealism and human rights, revealing a hideous visage of Predator drones, terror bombing, widespread slaughter, and colonialist arrogance underneath. Qaddafi has also ripped the mask of “Yes We Can” off Obama, revealing a cynical warmonger intent on the continuation of Bush’s infamous “Dead or Alive” and “Bring it on” policies, although by other means.

A Distant Mirror for Imperialists in Libya: Lucan’s Pharsalia

Modern imperialists eager to rush into Libya should ponder Lucan’s Pharsalia, which treats of warfare in the Libyan desert during the contest between Julius Caesar and Pompey the Great at the end of the Roman Republic. A critical passage in this Latin epic is the speech by Cato of Utica, a follower of Pompey, who urges his soldiers to undertake a suicide mission into Libya, saying: “Serpents, thirst, heat, and sand … Libya alone can present a multitude of woes that it would beseem men to fly from.” Cato goes forward, and finds “a little tomb to enclose [his] hallowed name, Libya secured the death of Cato….” [28]

Let us not imitate this folly.

Investigative leads from the West Point Study: An Appeal to Scholars

The West Point study, as noted, was conducted on the basis of almost 700 Al Qaeda personnel files captured by coalition forces in Iraq. The authors of the study have promised to keep available online the documentary basis of this investigation, both in the form of the raw Arabic language al Qaeda personnel files, and also of the same file cards in English translation. Assuming that this material remains available, it might be possible for researchers and reporters, and especially those with capabilities in Arabic not possessed by the present writer, to investigate the Libyan fighters who went into Iraq with a view to determining whether any of them are family members, neighbors, or even political associates of the known members of the Benghazi rebel council or of other anti-Qaddafi forces. Such a procedure could contribute to allowing the European and American public as well as others around the world to better understand the nature of the military adventure currently unfolding in Libya by gaining a more specific knowledge of who the Libyan rebels actually are, as distinct from the hollow panegyrics purveyed by the controlled Western media.

Attached documents

Joseph Felter and Brian Fishman, “Al Qa’ida’s Foreign Fighter in Iraq: A First Look at the Sinjar Records,” (West Point, NY: Harmony Project, Combating Terrorism Center, Department of Social Sciences, US Military Academy, December 2007).

(PDF – 824.6 kb)

 Webster G. Tarpley
Historian, journalist and analyst of US foreign policy. His most recent published work is Barack H. Obama: The Unauthorized Biography (Progressive Press, 20

.

May 24, 2011 Posted by | Anti War, Covert Ops, Middle East, World at War ( not the Game ) | , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment

The Titanic: The Mass Murder That Created the Federal Reserve Bank and the New World Order’s 20th Century?

http://blog.alexanderhiggins.com

The Intel Hub
Steve Stars
May 19, 2011

Was the Titanic a death trap designed to murder billionaires like John Jacob Astor who withstood J. P. Morgan and Rockefeller’s plan for the Federal Reserve banking system now robbing the entire world, while financing international wars?

Before you dismiss this as “conspiracy theory” you might want to read the book “Futility, the Wreck of the Titan” published in 1898, which predicted this event in almost exact detail 14 years before it happened!

The novel is about a ship called the Titan, the largest ocean liner in the world that sinks in the North Atlantic after hitting an ice shelf—virtually identical to the Titanic disaster.

James Cameron’s blockbuster hit film Titanic presents a sympathetic view of the disaster which portrays a grandfatherly Captain Edward J Smith, but  there are very good reasons to blame him for deliberately sinking the Titanic as a psychopathic disciple of the Jesuit/Free Mason agenda for world domination.

In light of the evidence, it makes far more sense than the flimsy explanations of why the Titanic was lost to mishaps in accident.  The Titanic was used to lure very wealthy financiers and kill them all at once, and make it look like an “accident.”

The myth goes on even today, and is perpetuated by people like James Cameron, who paint this massacre up as a tragedy, avoiding any question that still haunts history.

Almost 100 years after the sinking of the HMS Titanic, there are still arguments, investigations, mysteries and questions about what really happened.

Everyone knows the ship sank, but why did this happen after they ship had been warned over and over by other vessels in the area that they were heading into a brick wall of Ice shelf ahead? Was the Book about the wreck of the Titan the scripting of the murder?  That is the topic of our broadcast and discussion.

Live Radio show link with quest Steve Stars & Popeye from FederalJack on The Bob Tuskin Radio Show Thursday 5/19/2011 8pm-11pm EST
Radio Show link for Popeye’s Friday show w/ Steve Stars 5/20/2011 10pm-11pm EST

Map of Ice field:

http://motorcitytimes.com/mct/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/map1.jpg

.

read also this :

HMS Titanic vs 9/11

.

May 20, 2011 Posted by | Anti NWO, Covert Ops, Gran Theft Economics, New World Order | , , , , , | Leave a Comment

Imperialism: Bankers, Drug Wars and Genocide

by Prof. James Petras
Global Research, May 19, 2011
In May 2011, Mexican investigators uncovered another mass clandestine grave with dozens of mutilated corpses; bringing the total number of victims to 40,000 killed since 2006 when the Calderon regime announced its “war on drug traffickers”. Backed by advisers, agents and arms, the White House has been the principal promotor of a ‘war’ that has totally decimated Mexico ’s society and economy.

If Washington has been the driving force for the regime’s war, Wall Street banks have been the main instruments ensuring the profits of the drug cartels. Every major US bank has been deeply involved in laundering hundreds of billions of dollars in drug profits, for the better part of the past decade.

Mexico ’s descent into this inferno has been engineered by the leading US financial and political institutions, each supporting ‘one side or the other’ in the bloody “total war” which spares no one, no place and no moment in time. While the Pentagon arms the Mexican government and the US Drug Enforcement Agency enforces the “military solution”, the biggest US banks receive, launder and transfer hundreds of billions of dollars to the drug lords’ accounts, who then buy modern arms, pay private armies of assassins and corrupt untold numbers of political and law enforcement officials on both sides of the border.

Mexico’s Descent in the Inferno

Everyday scores, if not hundreds, of corpses – appear in streets and or are found in unmarked graves; dozens are murdered in their homes, cars, public transport, offices and even hospitals; known and unknown victims in the hundreds are kidnapped and disappear; school children, parents, teachers, doctors and businesspeople are seized in broad daylight and held for ransom or murdered in retaliation. Thousands of migrant workers are kidnapped, robbed, ransomed, murdered and evidence is emerging that some are sold into the illegal ‘organ trade’. The police are barricaded in their commissaries; the military, if and when it arrives, takes out its frustration on entire cities, shooting more civilians than cartel soldiers. Everyday life revolves around surviving the daily death toll; threats are everywhere, the armed gangs and military patrols fire and kill with virtual impunity. People live in fear and anger.

The Free Trade Agreement: The Sparks that lit the Inferno

In the late 1980’s, Mexico was in crisis, but the people chose a legal way out: they elected a President, Cuahtemoc Cardenas, on the basis of his national program to promote the economic revitalization of agriculture and industry. The Mexican elite, led by Carlos Salinas of the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) chose otherwise and subverted the election: The electorate was denied its victory; the peaceful mass protests were ignored. Salinas and subsequent Mexican presidents vigorously pursued a free trade agreement (NAFTA) with the US and Canada , which rapidly drove millions of Mexican farmers, ranchers and small business people into bankruptcy. Devastation led to the flight of millions of immigrant workers. Rural movements of debtors flourished and ebbed, were co-opted or repressed. The misery of the legal economy contrasted with the burgeoning wealth of the traffickers of drugs and people, which generated a growing demand for well-paid armed auxiliaries as soldiers for the cartels. The regional drug syndicates emerged out of the local affluence.

In the new millennium, popular movements and a new electoral hope arose: Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador (AMLO). By 2006 a vast peaceful electoral movement promised substantial social and economic reforms to ‘integrate millions of disaffected youth’. In the parallel economy, the drug cartels were expanding and benefiting from the misery of millions of workers and peasants marginalized by the Mexican elite, who had plundered the public treasury, speculated in real estate, robbed the oil industry and created enormous privatized monopolies in the communication and banking sectors.

In 2006, millions of Mexican voters were once again denied their electoral victory: The last best hope for a peaceful transformation was dashed. Backed by the US Administration, Felipe Calderon stole the election and proceeded to launch the “War on Drug Traffickers” strategy dictated by Washington .

The War Strategy Escalates the Drug War: The Banking Crises Deepens the Ties with Drug Traffickers

The massive escalation of homicides and violence in Mexico began with the declaration of a war on the drug cartels by the fraudulently elected President Calderon, a policy pushed initially by the Bush Administration and subsequently strongly backed by the Obama – Clinton regime. Over 40,000 Mexican soldiers filled the streets, towns and barrios – violently assaulting citizens – especially young people. The cartels retaliated by escalating their armed assaults on police. The war spread to all the major cities and along the major highways and rural roads; murders multiplied and Mexico descended further into a Dantesque inferno. Meanwhile, the Obama regime ‘reaffirmed’ its support for a militarist solution on both sides of the border: Over 500,000 Mexican immigrants were seized and expelled from the US ; heavily armed border patrols multiplied. Cross border gun sales grew exponentially .The US “market” for Mexican manufactured goods and agricultural products shrank, further widening the pool for cartel recruits while the supply of high powered weapons increased. White House gun and drug policies strengthened both sides in this maniacal murderous cycle: The US government armed the Calderon regime and the American gun manufacturers sold guns to the cartels through both legal and underground arms sales. Steady or increasing demand for drugs in the US – and the grotesque profits derived from trafficking and sales— remained the primary driving force behind the tidal wave of violence and societal disintegration in Mexico .

Drug profits, in the most basic sense, are secured through the ability of the cartels to launder and transfer billions of dollars through the US banking system. The scale and scope of the US banking-drug cartel alliance surpasses any other economic activity of the US private banking system. According to US Justice Department records, one bank alone, Wachovia Bank (now owned by Wells Fargo), laundered $378.3 billion dollars between May 1, 2004 and May 31, 2007 (The Guardian, May 11, 2011). Every major bank in the US has served as an active financial partner of the murderous drug cartels – including Bank of America, Citibank, and JP Morgan, as well as overseas banks operating out of New York , Miami and Los Angeles , as well as London .

While the White House pays the Mexican state and army to kill Mexicans suspected of drug trafficking, the US Justice Department belatedly slaps a relatively small fine on the major US financial accomplice to the murderous drug trade, Wachovia Bank, spares its bank officials from any jail time and allows major cases to lapse into dismissal.

The major agency of the US Treasury involved in investigating money laundering, the Undersecretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence, deliberately ignored the blatant collaboration of US banks with drug terrorists, concentrating almost their entire staff and resources on enforcing sanctions against Iran . For seven years, Treasury Undersecretary Stuart Levey used his power as head of the Department for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence to pursue Israel ’s phony “war on terrorism” against Iran , rather than shut down Wachovia’s money-laundering operations with the Mexican drug terrorists. In this period of time an estimated 40,000 Mexican civilian have been killed by the cartels and the army.

Without US arms and financial services supporting both the illegitimate Mexican regimes and the drug cartels – there could be no “drug war”, no mass killings and no state terror. The simple acts of stopping the flood of cheap subsidized US agriculture products into Mexico and de-criminalizing the use and purchase of cocaine in the US would dry up the pool of ‘cartel soldiers’ from the bankrupted Mexican peasantry and the cut back the profits and demand for illegal drugs in the US market.

The Drug Traffickers, the Banks and the White House

If the major US banks are the financial engines which allow the billion dollar drug empires to operate, the White House, the US Congress and the law enforcement agencies are the basic protectors of these banks. Despite the deep and pervasive involvement of the major banks in laundering hundreds of billions of dollars in illicit funds, the “court settlements” pursued by US prosecutors have led to no jail time for the bankers. One court’s settlement amounted to a fine of $50 million dollars, less than 0.5% of one of the banks (the Wachovia/Wells Fargo bank) $12.3 billion profits for 2009 (The Guardian, May 11, 2011). Despite the death of tens of thousands of Mexican civilians, US executive branch directed the DEA, the federal prosecutors and judges to impose such a laughable ‘punishment’ on Wachovia for its illegal services to the drug cartels. The most prominent economic officials of the Bush and Obama regimes, including Summers, Paulson, Geithner, Greenspan, Bernacke et al, are all long term associates, advisers and members of the leading financial houses and banks implicated in laundering the billions of drug profits.

Laundering drug money is one of the most lucrative sources of profit for Wall Street; the banks charge hefty commissions on the transfer of drug profits, which they then lend to borrowing institutions at interest rates far above what – if any – they pay to drug trafficker depositors. Awash in sanitized drug profits, these US titans of the finance world can easily buy their own elected officials to perpetuate the system.

Even more important and less obvious is the role of drug money in the recent financial meltdown, especially during its most critical first few weeks.

According to the head of United Nation’s Office on Drugs and Crime, Antonio Maria Costa, “In many instances, drug money (was)… currently the only liquid investment capital…. In the second half of 2008, liquidity was the banking system’s main problem and hence liquid capital became an important factor…interbank loans were funded by money that originated from drug trade and other illegal activities… (there were) signs that some banks were rescued in that way.” (Reuters, January 25,2009. US edition). Capital flows from the drug billionaires were key to floating Wachovia and other leading banks. In a word: the drug billionaires saved the capitalist financial system from collapse!

Conclusion

By the end of the first decade of the 21st century, it has become clear that capital accumulation, at least in North America, is intimately linked to generalized violence and drug trafficking. Because capital accumulation is dependent on financial capital, and the latter is dependent on the industry profits from the multi-hundred-billion dollar drug trade, the entire ensemble is embedded in the ‘total war’ over drug profits. In times of deep crises the very survival of the US financial system – and through it, the world banking system – is linked to the liquidity of the drug “industry”.

At the most superficial level the destruction of Mexican and Central American societies – encompassing over 100 million people – is a result of a conflict between drug cartels and the political regimes of the region. At a deeper level there is a multiplier or “ripple effect” related to their collaboration: the cartels draw on the support of the US banks to realize their profits; they spend hundreds of millions on the US arms industry and others to secure their supplies, transport and markets; they employ tens of thousands of recruits for their vast private armies and civilian networks and they purchase the compliance of political and military officials on both sides of the borders

For its part, the Mexican government acts as a conduit for US Pentagon/Federal police, Homeland Security, drug enforcement and political apparatuses prosecuting the ‘war’, which has put Mexican lives, property and security at risk. The White House stands at the strategic center of operations – the Mexican regime serves as the front-line executioners.

On one side of the “war on drugs” are the major Wall Street banks; on the other side, the White House and its imperial military strategists and in the ‘middle’ are 90 million Mexicans and 40,000 murder victims and counting.

Relying on political fraud to impose economic deregulation in the 1990’s (neo-liberalism), the US policies led directly to the social disintegration, criminalization and militarization of the current decade. The sophisticated narco-finance economy has now become the most advanced stage of neo-liberalism. When the respectable become criminals, the criminals become respectable.

The issue of genocide in Mexico has been determined by the empire and its “knowing” bankers and cynical rulers.

 Global Research Articles by James Petras.

May 19, 2011 Posted by | Americas, Anti NWO, Covert Ops, Drug Business, Genocides, Gran Theft Economics, New World Order | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment

The War on Libya: The media misinformation campaign behind the war (Part 2)

http://www.voltairenet.org

by Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya*

The International Criminal Court chief prosecutor has announced that he is seeking the arrest of Colonel Muammar Gaddafi for crimes against humanity, purporting to have evidence of his “widespread and systematic attacks on unarmed Libyan civilians”. In the second chapter of his study on the War on Libya, Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya dismantles the double standards and media fabrications that helped to sell the war, the same ones which are now likely to constitute the “evidence” for the ICC charges being brought against Gaddafi.



16 May 2011From
Ottawa (Canada)

Tools

 Print
 Send

Themes
 AfriCom: Control of Africa
 Communication

Countries
 Libya

Part 1: The war on Libya and the coming imperial re-division of Africa, 27 April 2011

The Violence in Benghazi

The starting epicentre of the violence in Libya was Benghazi, which is located within the boundaries of the coastal region of Cyrenaica or Barqa. [1] According to the U.S. government’s own sources:

On the evening of February 15, [2011] the […] demonstrations began when several hundred people gathered in front of the Benghazi police headquarters to protest the arrest of attorney and human rights activist Fethi Tarbel. As the February 17 [2011] “day of rage” neared, protests escalated in Benghazi and other cities despite reported police attempts at dispersion with water cannons, tear gas, rubber bullets, and batons. There were multiple reports of protestors setting police and other government buildings on fire. [2]

The maelstrom irrupted in Benghazi after a group of protesters rushed a local barrack to take the weapons in the armoury. When this happened, the Libyan forces in the local garrison reacted by firing upon the protesters. From there the situation in Benghazi and Libya escalated and things spiralled out of control.

A pause is in order and has to be taken here. This is where critical analysis is needed. There are two ways to perceive the events in Benghazi. One perspective is from the standpoint of a revolutionary and the other is from the perspective of the state and the soldiers. If all biases are put aside both perspectives will have their adherents.

It must be stated that the Libyan authorities for years have oppressed political opposition and that all humans have a natural right to resist tyranny. [3] On the other hand it has to be understood that in any country, including the United States and Britain, soldiers and security forces will fire on any of their own citizens that attack a military or police compound with the intention of taking its arms. [4] In this sense the events in Libya and Egypt, as well as the reaction of the U.S. and the E.U., can also be contrasted against one another.

The legitimacy of these actions can be argued over and questioned from both sides. The point here is not the legitimacy of what happened. The point here is that it must be emphasized clearly that all the governments that criticized Tripoli are hypocritical. These governments are hypocritical, because they would respond very similarly, if not identically, had this occurred in one of their states. These same governments would also support any country that would have reacted like this had that country been a proxy or ally. This is why the violence in Bahrain, Morocco, and Saudi Arabia are ignored and Israel is given a green light for its crimes against humanity.

There is no monopoly on violence at the level of the state. The Kent State University Massacre of May 4, 1970, when peaceful anti-war student protesters in Ohio were killed by the U.S. National Guard, is proof of this. One only needs to look at the reactions of the White House, London, and the E.U. towards the atrocities in Bahrain against an unarmed civilian population fighting for elementary human rights to see how phony their crocodile tears and postures are. It is also the U.S. that arranged for the Al-Sauds to intervene militarily into Bahrain and to militarily suppress the Bahraini people.

Double-Standards about Libya and Bahrain and other Arab Dictatorships

In Egypt, the U.S. and the E.U. called for restraint from both the protesters and the Mubarak regime and asked for both sides to negotiate with one another. The calls for restraint were pure hypocrisy. The U.S. and the E.U. made the calls for restraint to both sides even though the Egyptian protesters were unarmed and peaceful and the Mubarak regime was the side that was using violence and was the solely armed party for most the conflict. Calls of restraint should have been made only to the Egyptian regime and not to the predominately peaceful unarmed protesters. The cases in Bahrain and Tunisia are not much different either.

A totally different attitude has been applied by the U.S. and the E.U. to Libya than the attitude that has been applied to Tunisia, Egypt, Bahrain, Oman, Yemen, Jordan, Morocco, Saudi Arabia, and the corrupt Palestinian Authority. No sanctions were applied against the authorities in Bahrain by the U.S. and the E.U. when the Bahraini military without warning blatantly attacked peaceful protesters in Manama’s Pearl Square. The Bahraini protesters were completely peaceful, but this did not stop the ruling Al-Khalifas from ordering indiscriminate live firings on the crowds of Bahraini protesters.

In Bahrain a reign of terror and murder has been unleashed on the Bahraini people by the Al-Khalifas and the Al-Sauds, which has merely been ignored by the E.U. and Washington. A whole population is being systematically terrorized by an unwanted, hated, and foreign-imposed ruling family. Hospitals and children have been brutally attacked. Doctors and union leaders have been killed. Mosques have been bulldozed to the ground and an entire population has been put into detention. Bahrain is a second Palestine. Ironically, the Al-Khalifas have been thanked by Washington, NATO, and the leaders of the E.U. for joining the coalition against the Libyans. The Al-Khalifa regime has also been presented by the U.S. and the E.U. as a model Arab government.

In a blatant act of hypocrisy, the regimes of the Arab petro-sheikhdoms, which pushed forward an Arab League demand for a no-fly zone over Libya, have been presented as stewards and representatives of the Arab masses by Hillary Clinton and E.U. leaders. [5] How are they representatives of the Arab peoples, Arab choices, or even Arab popular opinion? The Arab Gulf (Khaliji) emirs are the anti-thesis of popular representation.

In reality these Arab sheikhdoms are a few individuals who act as they like and are not representative of any of the views of their own citizens in any way. So it is extremely phony and two-faced when Hillary Clinton, Monsieur Sarkozy, and David Cameron present these Arab sheikdoms as representing the Arab people and of Arab positions. These Arab despots are not the representatives of the sentiments of Arabdom, they only represent themselves and repress real Arab sentiments.

In contrast to the verbal condemnations and sanctions against Libya, no actions were taken against the Al-Khalifas in Bahrain. While the jet attack claims against Libyans were fabricated, the evidence of indiscriminate firing on protesters – including by tanks – were verified by video footage from within Bahrain and by human rights groups. The reactions to Bahrain and Libya and the media reports about both Arab countries have been diametrically opposed.

Double-Standards about Mercenaries

Most of the forces used by the Al-Khalifahs in Bahrain are foreigners and mercenaries. This includes foreign military personnel from both Jordan and Saudi Arabia. As mentioned earlier, the Al-Sauds even sent military reinforcements to Bahrain to crush the civilian protests. Yet, there has been a systematic and exaggerated emphasis placed on Qaddafi’s foreign mercenaries. Has the use of foreign mercenaries in Bahrain been highlighted? The answer is no.

Moreover, the U.S., Britain, France, and their allies are no in any position based on moral grounds to criticize Tripoli for using mercenaries. All these powers actively and openly use and employ mercenaries – far more than Libya – under the terminologies of private contractors or security firms. Britain even has a whole brigade of mercenaries, the Brigade of Gurkhas, which even trains with U.S. forces. The French Foreign Legion is also a group of foreign soldiers employed by Paris. Washington itself is the largest employer of mercenaries and bounty hunters on the planet.

This is also the reason that the sixth section of the U.N. sanctions resolution 1970 (Peace and Security in Africa) passed against Tripoli by the U.N. Security Council specifically prevents mercenaries from countries that are not signatories to the International Criminal Court (I.C.C.) from being prosecuted. [6] Additionally, this is tied to British and U.S. plans to send an army of mercenaries into Libya as part of their future ground operations. Resolution 1970’s Article 6 states:

Decides that nationals, current or former officials or personnel from a State outside the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya which is not a party to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court shall be subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of that State for all alleged acts or omissions arising out of or related to operations in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya established or authorized by the Council, unless such exclusive jurisdiction has been expressly waived by the State[.] [7]

The Daily Telegraph in Britain has also pointed this out too in an informative news commentary that exposes the double-standards being applied under the name of international justice and humanitarianism. It is as follows:

The key paragraph said that anyone from a non-ICC country alleged to have committed crimes in Libya would “be subject to the exclusive jurisdiction” of their own country. It was inserted despite Susan Rice, the US ambassador to the UN, saying that all those “who slaughter civilians” would “be held personally accountable”.

Speaking to reporters outside the council chamber, Gerard Araud, the French UN ambassador, described the paragraph as “a red line for the United States”, meaning American diplomats had been ordered by their bosses in Washington to secure it. “It was a deal-breaker, and that’s the reason we accepted this text to have the unanimity of the council,” said [Gerard] Araud. [8]

Resolution 1970 also puts an arms embargo on Tripoli and makes a whole set of demands from Libya that none of the other Arab states that are oppressing their populations have been asked to comply with. Even when reports of killings by government forces were being made, nothing of the sort was applied to Egypt, Tunisia, Yemen, Jordan, or Bahrain.

In another case of double-standards and a mockery, the Arab League has also suspended Libya from the pan-Arab organization due to the use of violence. The majority of the members of the Arab League, from the Palestinian Authority to Saudi Arabia and Egypt, have brutally used violence against peaceful protesters even while they were criticizing Libya. When other Arab leaders are also using force to suppress their own citizens they are being given a platform by the U.S. and the E.U. to spurn Libya. Using a phrase used by Palestinians, Lebanese, and Iraqis to describe the behaviour of the Arab sheikhdoms and presidential dictatorships against there countries, it can be said that another “Arab conspiracy” is taking place. Libya is being betrayed, just as the corrupt heads of the members of the Arab League betrayed Palestine, Lebanon, and Iraq.

Fuelling the Flames: Arming Both Sides

In Libya, the U.S. and its E.U. partners are fanning the flames of sedition. A prolonged civil war is in their interest. It allows them to weaken Libya as a state and it has allowed them to manipulate global public opinion in a managed discourse favouring interventionism. Both deception and the tactics of divide and conquer are at play. Simply stated, the U.S. and the E.U. are playing both sides. They have provided material support to both sides. They first supported Qaddafi through military hardware and training that lasted up until the start of 2011, while they now support the forces opposed to Qaddafi. If they refer to Libya as a “killing field” then it should be pointed it out that it is a “killing field” that they created and made possible.

Washington has had a hand in all of the violence in Libya. Neither the Bush Jr. Administration nor the Obama Administration have shied away from training the Libyan military:

- For FY2010, the Obama Administration requested $350,000 in International Military Education and Training (IMET) funding for Libya to “support education and training of Libyan security forces, creating vital linkages with Libyan officers after a 35-year break in contact.” Participation in the IMET program also makes the Libyan government eligible to purchase additional U.S. military training at a reduced cost. The Bush Administration’s FY2009 request for IMET funding indicated that “the Government of Libya would pay for additional training and education with national funds.” However, no IMET funding was provided in FY2009, according to State Department budget documents.

- The Obama Administration also requested Foreign Military Financing assistance for Libya for the first time in FY2010, with the goal of providing assistance to the Libyan Air Force in developing its air transport capabilities and to the Libyan Coast Guard in improving its coastal patrol and search and rescue operations. FY2011 FMF assistance is being requested to support Libyan participation in a program that assists countries seeking to maintain and upgrade their U.S.-made C-130 air transport fleets. [9]

London’s arms sales to Qaddafi’s government have also been significant: “According to the Department for Business Innovation [and] Skills (BIS), £181.7 million (Dh1.09 billion)-worth of arms export licences were granted from [Britain] to Libya in the third quarter of 2010 — up from £22 million in second quarter.” [10] On the basis of the agreements between Tony Blair and Colonel Qaddafi, Britain was even training members of the Libyan police force, including a major and a brigadier, at Huddersfield University in West Yorkshire during the start of the conflict in Libya. [11]

The double-standards being applied by these powers are visible in every nuance and fabric of their actions. The Associated Press (AP) unwittingly points this out in a report summing up the London Conference on Libya:

GIF - 47.3 kb
Muammar Gaddafi and Franco Frattini in friendlier times.

Italian Foreign Minister Franco Frattini said negotiations on securing Gadhafi’s exit were being conducted with “absolute discretion” and that there were options on the table that hadn’t yet been formalized.

“What is indispensable is that there be countries that are willing to welcome Gadhafi and his family, obviously to end this situation which otherwise could go on for some time,” he said.

Frattini had said earlier that he hoped some nation would offer a proposal.

But the Italian diplomat insisted there was no option of immunity for Gadhafi. “We cannot promise him a ‘safe-conduct’ pass,” he stressed. [12]

While condemning Qaddafi, saying that he will have no “immunity,” they also are talking about a “safe-haven” where he will be immune. Furthermore, while the British have said that they know very little about the Transitional Council in Benghazi, Admiral James Stavridis has told the U.S. Armed Service Committee that he is, either as the head of U.S. European Command (EUCOM) or NATO, very well aware of the composure of the opposition. [13] This is contradictory; in this case London says one thing, but the head of military operations for NATO says something else.

At the same time the U.S., Britain, and their allies have left open an option to even betray the Transitional Council. This is typical foreign policy behaviour for London, Washington, and their allies. William Hague has hinted about this: “‘We [meaning Britain, the U.S., and their allies] must never be complacent about the way events like this could turn out,’ Hague said. ‘If things go wrong in the region on a sustained basis, there could be new opportunities for terrorism or extremism.’” [14] Thus, the spectre of Al-Qaeda and its ties to the Transitional Council is starting to emerge in the picture and discourse.

The Propaganda War: Media Distortion about Libya

Perception management has been used to start the war against Libya and to garnish support for the aggression against Libya. This is part of a tradition that the Pentagon and NATO have followed. All the major wars the U.S. has fought in have involved major media lies. In Vietnam there was the Gulf of Tonkin incident, in Yugoslavia the claims of ethnic genocide, in Afghanistan the tragic events of 9/11 (September 11, 2011), and in Iraq the lies about weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) and cooperation between Baghdad and Osama bin Laden. The mainstream media has been the first line of attack in these wars of aggression.

In regards to Iraq, the U.S. government brought a false witness to the U.S. Congress who while pretending to be a Kuwaiti nurse testified that Iraqi soldiers threw 312 Kuwaiti babies out of incubators to die. [15] This was used to galvanize public opinion in the U.S. in order to go to war with Iraq in 1991. The infamous Nurse Nayirah testimony was given by Nijrah (Nayirah) Al-Sabah the daughter of the Kuwaiti envoy to Washington. She was even given acting lessons by a public relations (P.R.) firm before her false testimony, which George H. Bush Sr. referred to when justifying going to war with Iraq. [16]

- The Fabricated Jet Attacks on Civilians

At the end of the Gulf War, Saddam Hussein was demonized after he put down rebellions that were instigated by the U.S. and its allies. Now Qaddafi is presented like Saddam Hussein as a monster killing his own people. The justification for establishing the no-fly zones over Libya, which in effect was a smokescreen for launching an undeclared war, were the media claims that Libyan military jets were attacking civilian protesters. The Financial Times is worth quoting to illustrate how the media claims were used to argue for military intervention by NATO leaders:

We must not tolerate this regime using military force [referring to the the jet attacks] against its own people,” David Cameron, [the British] prime minister, said. “In that context I have asked the Ministry of Defence and the Chief of the Defence Staff to work with our allies on plans for a military no-fly zone.” [17]

U.S. and E.U. officials made hard verbal condemnations against Colonel Qaddafi when these reports about jets firing on protesters were made. There is nothing that corroborates this. The reports turned out to be false like the claims about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. These types of criminal fabrications should not be allowed to go unpunished either.

The Russian military was monitoring Libya from space and saw no signs of jet attacks on civilians. [18] No satellite evidence even showed damage caused by jets. Nor was one piece of video evidence produced about this, while all sorts of footage had been coming out of Libya. The Pentagon, the E.U., and NATO all had access to the same satellite technology and intelligence to verify if such attacks were made, which means that they knew the reports were false.

Libyan military planes only got involved later on during the conflict during missions to bomb ammunition depots to prevent the rebels from getting arms. This was fairly later in the conflict and after the media claims were made that jets were firing on protesters. Libyan air power was also virtually non-existent before and after the foreign intervention. Admiral Locklear, who is the U.S. Navy commander that led the attacks at the onset of the war, even told reporters that “[Libya’s] air force before coalition operations was ‘not in good repair,’ and that [Libya’s] tactical capability consisted of several dozen helicopters.” Despite this reality, Libyan air power was systematically portrayed as a major threat to Libyan civilians.

- Who is behind the Massacres and Acts of Brutality in Libya?

Stories were also presented that Libyan forces were killing individuals from within their own ranks that refused to fight. Video evidence from within Libya actually proved that video footage presented alongside these reports about Libya was spun. It was not the Libyan forces that killed these men, but elements within the Libyan opposition. Videos showing torture and brutal treatment of civilians, including a small boy, by elements from within the rebel fighters are also appearing.

The Salvador option is being used in Libya. Speculatively, these elements were probably working as foreign agents. Footage has surfaced of a small boy in a Libyan hospital being helped by doctors after he was tortured. The doctors are looking at the little boy who has a thin pole shoved through his body, going through from near his penis all the way through to his left shoulder. The video demonstrates something very important. What happened to the little boy was not the work of any laymen. These were individuals who had to be trained in torture, because of the way the pole was sent through the body of the little boy who was not killed by the incision. This points to actors outside of Libya. These cases of torture resemble the brutal cases and murders that were being carried out in El Salvador and later in Anglo-American occupied Iraq.

JPEG - 14.9 kb
British “undercover soldiers” caught driving booby trapped car – Basra (Iraq), 19 September 2005.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index….

It has to also be emphasized that Britain sent commandos into Iraq that were disguised as local Arabs to bomb local mosques and areas with civilians in order to create sectarian fighting amongst the Iraqis. [19] It is not beyond the realm of possibility that this is also being replicated amongst the Libyans and other Arab peoples in order to divide them and to fuel civil strife. Nor should the doctored pictures made by Britain and the U.S. about Iraqis greeting Anglo-American forces as liberators be forgotten either.

- The Racist Victimization of Black Libyans by the Mainstream Media

Although Qaddafi has used mercenaries from Europe and Africa, racist and exaggerated reports about mercenaries were inseminated globally about the so-called “African mercenaries.” Many members of the Libyan military and the Libyan general population were presented as foreigners from other African countries. In reality, many Libyans are black-skinned.

Being an Arab does not ascribe one to any particular phenotype or physical look, because it is the use of the Arabic language that defines the Arab identity. Arabs can be black-skinned or of a Mediterranean complexion or of a fair-skinned complexion with blond hair. The same is true about being a Berber. This is also very true of all Libyans and other North Africans.

JPEG - 27.3 kb
Black Libyan soldier murdered by the rebels.

In Libya many Libyans are black-skinned. They are not foreigners or mercenaries. Amongst the Negroid Libyans are the Haratins (Harratins) and the Tuareg people (Kel Tamajaq or Kel Tamashq) in the south. These Libyans are as Libyan as the other inhabitants of the country. Although there are foreign mercenaries in Libya, what the outside media managed to do was present footage of some of these black-skinned Libyans serving in the Libyan military and police forces under the label of foreign mercenaries. This was done to demonize Qaddafi and to create an atmosphere for intervention, because Qaddafi was presented as killing his people with a massive army of African mercenaries. In additions, the plight and murder of the scores of “Black Libyans” or foreign workers from sub-Sahara(n) Africa, which in many cases were barbarically decapitated and mutilated, have been ignored and not even covered by the same media outlets that talked about Qaddafi using African mercenaries.

- Misinformation about the Momentum of Anti-Qaddafi Protests

Leading up to the war on Libya, all sorts of inaccurate reports were made by the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC), Sky News, CNN, and other major networks. For example Al Jazeera reported that Shokri Ghanem, a top energy official in Libya, had fled Libya, but Reuters confirmed that this was not true. [20] Ghamen protested to Al Jazeera’s misreporting in an interview with Reuters: “‘This is not true, I am in my office and I will be on TV in a few minutes’ Ghamen said by telephone.” [21]

At the very outset of the Anglo-American invasion of Iraq the North America media almost daily that U.S. tanks were at near the gates of Baghdad. Something similar has been reported about Libya in regards to the anti-Qaddafi protests. Incorrect reports were also made about cities that had fallen, but in reality old videos were being aired or footage of other Libyan cities were being shown on network television.

Other reports claimed that there was major fighting in Tripoli and parts of it had fallen, when Tripoli was actually peaceful for days. Later on, the words “claim” and “claimed” were systematically used when these reports were made in an effort to vindicate distorted or incorrect information. On February 26, 2011 reports were made claiming that all the main Libyan cities where no longer under the control of the Libyan government. This was false. Cities like Sabha (in central Libya), Sirte/Surt (on the coastal mid-point of Libya), Ghat (on the southern border with Algeria), Al-Jufra, Al-Azizya (close to Tripoli), and Tripoli itself were all under the control of Qaddafi’s government. [22] Overall the original coverage of the events in Libya grossly blew the violence out of proportion in order to justify the agenda of foreign intervention. Like the case of Iraq, with time the people of the world will realize this, but will there those who helped create these fabricated reports be held accountable for starting and supporting a war?

The Propaganda War within Libya

It should, however, be cautioned that a propaganda war is being fought by multiple sides. The U.S. and its allies have not held the solitary monopoly on propaganda. There are four major sides to the media war. The Libyan government in Tripoli and the Benghazi-based Transitional Council have also been involved in “perception management.” Aside from the foreign-based mainstream media there are two distinct sides of the media war within Libya. At the start of the NATO intervention in North Africa, the Libyan government in Tripoli reported that French and Qatari fighter jets were shot down. The Libyan government exhibited on Jamahiriya News what it claimed were three downed French and two downed Qatari pilots. The news came during the opening salvos of the war and it was brief and was never discussed afterward. [23] Additionally, the Libyan government and the Libyan Jamahiriya Broadcasting Corporation also tried to present the capture of an Italian civilian vessel as a military victory by Libya against Italy and NATO.

The Transitional Council too has been waging an intense propaganda war. With the help of Qatar the Transitional Council has established its own television and news channel. [24] This is how the Los Angeles Times described the news sources run by the Transitional Council:

“It’s not exactly fair and balanced media. In fact, as [Mohammed G.] Fannoush [the former librarian who runs the media for the Transitional Council] helpfully pointed out [in his own words], there are four inviolate rules of coverage on the two rebel radio stations, TV station and newspaper:

“No pro-[Qaddafi] reportage or commentary (at least until the tyrant in Tripoli is deposed).

No mention of a civil war. (The Libyan people, east and west, are unified in a war against a totalitarian regime.)

No discussion of tribes or tribalism. (There is only one tribe: Libya.)

No references to Al Qaeda or Islamic extremism. (That’s [Qaddafi’s] propaganda.)” [25]

Moreover, Fannoush himself as the head of the opposition media acknowledged to the Los Angeles Times that the media in Benghazi serves as a mouthpiece for the Transitional Council. [26] The New York Times, which has predominately been supportive of the Transitional Council has been more blunt about the Transitional Council’s credibility: “[L]ike the chiefs of the Libyan state news media, the rebels feel no loyalty to the truth in shaping propaganda, claiming nonexistent battlefield victories, asserting they were still fighting in a key city days after it fell to Qaddafi forces, and making vastly inflated claims of his barbaric [acts].” [27]

The Transitional Council’s forces have even detained and interrogated Russian journalists. This is because of the generally unfavourable coverage of the NATO war in Libya by Russian journalists. Two reporters from Komsomolskaya Pravda and three television journalists from NTV, which is owned by Gazprom, were abducted and released in early-April 2011 by the Transitional Council. [28]

The Transitional Council Leadership Always Supported Military Intervention

Contradicting statements are not only being made by the U.S. government and Western European governments. The self-appointed figures of the Benghazi-based Transitional Council opposed to Qaddafi are also making contradictory statements. The Transitional Council has been described as being similar to Qaddafi’s regime, because “the operation around the rebel council is rife with family ties.” [29] Moreover, the Transitional Council’s claims against Qaddafi are also similar to those made by Ahmed Chalabi and the Iraqi National Congress against Saddam Hussein.

Take for example the position of General Abdul Fatah Al-Yunis (Al-Younis), Qaddafi’s interior minister who defected. General Al-Yunis has said: “[H]e believed that the [W]est should be ready to launch airstrikes against Colonel Gaddafi’s palace in Tripoli to prevent him [from] attacking the Libyan people with chemical weapons or causing terrible casualties in some other way. He [also said that he] was also in favour of establishing an international no-fly zone as soon as possible.” [30]

More importantly, there is a huge divide between the Transitional Council and the Libyans they purportedly represent. In Benghazi and its environs there were English posters and signs in English intended for foreing media cameras, saying “No Foreign Intervention,” “Libyan People Can Manage it Alone,” and “No To Foreign Military Intervention” as a message representing popular sentiment amongst the Libyan people on the anti-Qaddafi side. Wide sentiment against the U.S. and Britain in particular also existed in Benghazi and the region of Barqa.

The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly in Libya

Despite what media sources from outside Libya were claiming at the outset of the revolt in Libya, Qaddafi’s back was not against the wall. He controlled most the country and a majority of the population, specifically in the western and southern parts of Libya, still supported him for a multitude of reasons. Hereto, Qaddafi still has wide support within the security and military apparatus of his country, not to mention his own tribe, militias, and the common people of Tripoli.

JPEG - 30 kb
According to this author, the media has also distored Qaddafi’s latest message about being “in a place they can’t reach him.” He was not referring to a physical place; he was talking about the hearts of the Libyan people.

What the war against Libya has done is widen Qaddafi’s base of support. Patriotism has been a huge factor. Many good people who opposed Qaddafi at one point or another have united and locked ranks with Qaddafi and his regime. They have done this, because they believe that they have to stand united to save Libya from falling prey to the U.S. and its coalition and becoming a new and divided colony. To them Qaddafi is not the real target; Libya and Africa are the real targets.

In a manner of speaking the good, the bad, and the ugly have been united under the Libyan regime’s ranks. This is also one of the reasons that the Pentagon and Brussels are working to make sure that internal divisions in Libya are continuously fuelled. They will use the Libyan people against one another to divide Libya.

The Libyan people have been led into a trap and they are being misled. It must also be pointed out that the good, the bad, and the ugly have also gathered together on the Benghazi-based opposition side led by the Transitional Council.

The enemy’s of genuine freedom and of the Libyan people have taken advantage of the situation in Libya. There is plenty of blame to go around in Libya, but its people must not fight one another. Libya collectively and as a whole lost the moment violence started. Nor can the Libyans let foreigners settle their differences. Any solution must be an internal one without any foreign interference.

 Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya
Canadian-based sociologist and scholar. Research Associate of the Center for Research on Globalization (CRG), specializing in geopolitical and strategic issues..

May 16, 2011 Posted by | Anti government protests, Anti War, Covert Ops, Disinformation, Middle East, World at War ( not the Game ) | , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

The False Death of Osama bin Laden – a Perfect Psyop Propaganda to Promote the Gullibility of American Idiots

http://www.sott.net

Tue, 03 May 2011 16:32 CDT
Jefferson

“If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be.” – T. Jefferson

“We are never deceived; we deceive ourselves.” – Goethe

“All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.” – Schopenhauer

* * *
What happens this week is pitiful and laughably absurd.

Following the September 11, 2001 inside job, there has been speculation on the whereabouts of Osama bin Laden.

According to research with the reported resources, such as the news media (Fox News and CBS-TV News), What Really Happened and Veterans Today chief editor Gordon Duff, Osama has been dead for a long time.

I can only speculate that the episode is a psyop exercise to provide the soothing peace of mind for the American public subject to full-throttle media propaganda, while continuing, unabatedly, one of the greatest, deadliest, and most expensive hoaxes of all time — “The War on Terror.”

The reasons for the fabled “War on Terror” are many.

War profiteering. Oil and natural gas theft with the grand plan yet to be implemented. Opium production for heroin trade. Buffer of security for State of Israel by overcoming the neighboring “enemies.” Personal vendetta. Bestial jingoism. Perpetual fraud in excess and ceaseless taxation on the American and the citizens and people of the other “coalition” nations to profit the few, the true plutocrat-oligarchs, namely “Zio-Elite”.

As long as there is no absolute proof of Osama’s corpse (non-faked and clearly identifiable) in photographs and video, it will remain a fabrication to provide the psychologically gratifying “closure” so the United States Government continue to perpetuate the fraud.

It is because of the great fraud of 9/11, among crimes such as JFK assassination, Waco incident, TWA 800, etc, that the U.S. Government warrants abolition on ground of corruption and malfeasance, per the instruction of the Declaration of Independence written by Thomas Jefferson:

“That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, – That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. …”

Interesting short notice and fortuitous timing on disposing “alleged” Osama’s body in a sea burial, which is criticized by Islamic scholars and adherents.

May the corrupt and unrestrained monster of the U.S. Government dissolve in the future by collapse and new revolution, by no fault of our own but apathy, negligence and willful self-deception, which allow the U.S. Government to commit the odious crimes, domestically and overseas.

.

May 5, 2011 Posted by | 9/11, Covert Ops, Disinformation | , , , , , , | Leave a Comment