Get Adobe Flash player
You are here:FEATURED STORIES > Obama Administration Caught Running False Flag's

War Criminals: Obama Administration Caught Running False Flag Operations for illegal wars

American in Tripoli: First Hand Account

RT | Investigative reporter Wayne Madsen, who spent some time in Libya, shares his views on what’s really going on in the country Libya, shares his views on what’s really going on in the country and why the mainstream media deliberately misinforms the public about real goals of NATO.




http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kcs6S1k3W5k&feature=player_embedded
  

WAR CRIMINALS: In North America Governments

PNAC-Reborn: Calling for Greater Libyan War - Saturday, June 25, 2011
Tony Cartalucci | War criminals from the Foreign Policy Initiative implore House Republicans to ignore the people & the Constitution for continued war with Libya.For those that want a list of who is responsible for what ails America and the world, one could get a good start by examining the signatories of the Foreign Policy Initiative’s latest signed confession.

Infowars.com
June 25, 2011

For those that want a list of who is responsible for what ails America and the world, one could get a good start by examining the signatories of the Foreign Policy Initiative’s latest signed confession. Titled, “An Open Letter to the House Republicans” they implore House Republicans to not only support the un-Constitutional war being waged in America’s name on the Fortune 500′s behalf, but to “achieve the goal of removing Qaddafi from power.” Apparently we were all lied to when we were told the goal of our intervention in Libya was to “protect civilians.” As reported in May,Libya will be won at any cost, and the initial lies used to tip-toe us into the conflict were but a temporary pretense for a war of total domination.



Recycled PNAC sleaze: Now calling themselves theForeign Policy Initiative, they constitute a full-time corporate and government subsidized war lobbying organization. Many of the signatories of FPI’s latest letter include members of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies.
….

Not only has the slaughter of those very civilians at the hands of NATO contradicted NATO’s stated purpose for intervening, so has the fact that the US and NATO are supporting rebels who are admittedly terrorists, who are photographed on a daily basis using the same indiscriminate weapons such as grad rockets the West has accused Qaddafi of using, and committing on record the same atrocities Qaddafi is baselessly accused of committing. Now apparently the real architects behind the operation, fearing that their bloodbath may be coming to a premature end, have revealed themselves and the true “finish line” for the war in Libya.

The letter exclaims, “We should be doing more to help the Libyan opposition, which deserves our support. We should not be allowing ourselves to be held hostage to U.N. Security Council resolutions and irresolute allies.” Utterly unfazed by not only casting aside the very international law they claim is giving them the right to murder Libyans in the first place, and having already cast to the wayside the US Constitution they are all accountable to, they reveal that indeed, they see themselves as accountable to no one. Such is the very despotic barbarism the corporatocracy, through their feckless puppet politicians and media organizations, have convinced thousands of brave Americans to go overseas and fight.

The letter concludes, “The United States must see this effort in Libya through to its conclusion. Success is profoundly in our interests and in keeping with our principles as a nation. The success of NATO’s operations will influence how other Middle Eastern regimes respond to the demands of their people for more political rights and freedoms. For the United States and NATO to be defeated by Muammar al-Qaddafi would suggest that American leadership and resolution were now gravely in doubt—a conclusion that would undermine American influence and embolden our nation’s enemies.” In reality, Libya is meant to serve as an example to other nations targeted by these meddling, thuggish, unaccountable global despots. Failure in Libya would not “embolden our nation’s enemies,” but rather embolden those seeking justice against the signatories and architects of the current engineered unrest festering worldwide.

The following names represent not only Libya’s real enemies, but America’s as well. These traitors need to be watched, reported on, arrested by law enforcement, and put on trial for their crimes. Additionally, the corporations they do business with and represent need to be brought to their knees through a merciless full-spectrum boycott, and every sentator or representative that shakes their hands, deals with them, or heeds their calls (Lieberman, McCain, Graham, to name a few), voted out of office forever. Look at these names; each one has a story of treason and betrayal against the great American Republic that could fill a book. After reading each name, please contact your representatives in Congress and politely tell them that should they heed this letter from these degenerate, treasonous war mongers, they will be unemployed next election.

The names are as follows:

Elliott Abrams, Bruce Pitcairn Jackson, John Podhoretz, Gary Bauer, Ash Jain, Stephen G. Rademaker, Max Boot,Frederick Kagan, Karl Rove, Ellen Bork, Robert Kagan, Randy Scheunemann, Scott Carpenter, Lawrence Kaplan, Gary Schmitt, Liz Cheney, William Kristol, Dan Senor, Seth Cropsey, Robert Lieber, Michael Singh, Thomas Donnelly, Tod Lindberg, Henry D. Sokolski, Colin Dueck, Michael Makovsky, Marc Thiessen, Eric Edelman, Ann Marlowe, Kurt Volker, Jamie Fly, Clifford D. May, Kenneth Weinstein, Reuel Marc Gerecht, Joshua Muravchik, Paul Wolfowitz, John Hannah, Martin Peretz, R. James Woolsey, William Inboden, and Danielle Pletka.

 

Amnesty questions claim that Gaddafi ordered rape as weapon of war - Saturday, June 25, 2011
Human rights organisations have cast doubt on claims of mass rape and other abuses perpetrated by forces loyal to Colonel Muammar Gaddafi, which have been widely used to justify Nato’s war in Libya.

 

Patrick Cockburn
London Independent
June 25, 2011

Human rights organisations have cast doubt on claims of mass rape and other abuses perpetrated by forces loyal to Colonel Muammar Gaddafi, which have been widely used to justify Nato’s war in Libya.

Nato leaders, opposition groups and the media have produced a stream of stories since the start of the insurrection on 15 February, claiming the Gaddafi regime has ordered mass rapes, used foreign mercenaries and employed helicopters against civilian protesters.

An investigation by Amnesty International has failed to find evidence for these human rights violations and in many cases has discredited or cast doubt on them. It also found indications that on several occasions the rebels in Benghazi appeared to have knowingly made false claims or manufactured evidence.

The findings by the investigators appear to be at odds with the views of the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, Luis Moreno-Ocampo, who two weeks ago told a press conference that “we have information that there was a policy to rape in Libya those who were against the government. Apparently he [Colonel Gaddafi] used it to punish people.”

Full article here

 

U.S. House keeps Libya funding, fails to authorize mission - Saturday, June 25, 2011
Xinhua & RT | Will illegal war sink Obama’s presidency?A resolution that bars most funding for the U.S. military mission in Libya failed in the U.S. House of Representatives on Friday, shortly after another measure authorizing the Libya mission suffered the same fate.

June 25, 2011

A resolution that bars most funding for the U.S. military mission in Libya failed in the U.S. House of Representatives on Friday, shortly after another measure authorizing the Libya mission suffered the same fate.

The resolution, offered by Rep. Tom Rooney and supported by House Republicans, strikes current-year defense funding for the Libya mission except for search and rescue, intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance, aerial refueling and operational planning. It failed the House on a 180-238 vote.

A majority of House Republicans supported the bill, with 144 voting in favor of and 89 against it. Democrats were less divided with 36 for and 149 against.

The vote gave the White House a somewhat surprise victory in its spat with the Congress on war powers, as the measure was supported by Republican leadership. House Speaker John Boehner said during floor debate that the measure represents a “reasonable approach” that would let the United States continue to help its NATO allies.



Democrats, on the other hand, argued that limited activities would prevent the United States from helping much with the humanitarian mission, and several of them suggested that the U.S. side needs more authority than what was offered in the bill.

The House earlier in the day voted to defeat a measure authorizing the U.S. mission in Libya, which was designed to approve limited operations for one year but disallow the use of ground forces. It was supported by President Barack Obama.

After the first measure was rejected, White House Spokesman Jay Carney said the administration was “disappointed by that vote.”

“We continue to welcome expressions of support for our mission with our NATO allies and others in Libya,” said Carney. “We think now is not the time to send the kind of mixed message.”

According to the U.S. Constitution, the Congress has the right to declare wars. The 1973 War Powers Resolution prohibits U.S. armed forces from being involved in military actions for over 60 days, with a 30-day withdrawal period, without an authorization of the use of military force or a declaration of war. Congress members have been demanding the Obama administration seek approval for continued participation in the Libya conflict.

But the White House argues U.S. military’s support role in Libya does not meet the threshold set by the War Powers Resolution, and therefore requires no Congressional approval.

 read more ...

Top U.S. admiral admits we are trying to kill Qaddafi - Saturday, June 25, 2011
Imagine my shock. Bombing his compound every week and assassinating his grandchildren didn’t give us enough of a hint that Gaddafi was a target. Recall of course that Obama, Cameron, and numerous other military officials claimed that he was never a target.

 

Comment: Imagine my shock. Bombing his compound every week and assassinating his grandchildren didn’t give us enough of a hint that Gaddafi was a target. Recall of course that Obama, Cameron, and numerous other military officials claimed that he was never a target.

FLASHBACK: Removing Gaddafi not allowed, says David Cameron

FLASHBACK: Obama: U.S. Is Not Targeting Qaddafi But Has Tools To Do So

FLASHBACK: Gaddafi ‘not a target’, says UK military chief

Josh Rogin
The Cable
Friday, June 24, 2011

The top U.S. admiral involved in the Libya war admitted to a U.S. congressman that NATO forces are trying to kill Libyan leader Muammar al-Qaddafi. The same admiral also said he anticipated the need for ground troops in Libya after Qaddafi falls, according to the lawmaker.

House Armed Services Committee member Mike Turner (R-OH) told The Cable that U.S. Admiral Samuel Locklear, commander of the NATO Joint Operations Command in Naples, Italy, told him last month that NATO forces are actively targeting and trying to kill Qaddafi, despite the fact that the Obama administration continues to insist that “regime change” is not the goal and is not authorized by the U.N. mandate authorizing the war.

“The U.N. authorization had three components: blockade, no fly zone, and civil protection. And Admiral Locklear explained that the scope of civil protection was being interpreted to permit the removal of the chain of command of Qaddafi’s military, which includes Qaddafi,” Turner said. “He said that currently is the mission as NATO has defined.”

“I believed that we were [targeting Qaddafi] but that confirmed it,” Turner said. “I believe the scope that NATO is pursuing is beyond what is contemplated in civil protection, so they’re exceeding the mission.”

Full story here.

 

Ron Paul Slams Absurd Libya War Powers Debate - Saturday, June 25, 2011
The State Column | Paul told his colleagues that the limited funding bill was not what it appeared to be.

Ron Paul: Libya Funding Bill Must Be ‘Straight and Clean’

The State Column
June 25, 2011


 

Rep. Ron Paul (R-Tex.), a candidate for the Republican presidential nomination, came down hard today against a House bill (HR 2278) that would have limited the use of funds for the U.S.’s involvement in the Libya War. The House also rejected the limited funding bill for the Libya War, while also striking down a resolution that would have authorized the limited use of U.S. Armed Forces in Libya.

Today, Paul told his colleagues that the limited funding bill was not what it appeared to be. Paul argued that the Libya bill “masquerades as a limitation of funds for the president’s war on Libya but is in fact an authorization for that very war.” The purpose of the Libya bill was to “limit the use of funds appropriated to the Department of Defense for United States Armed Forces in support of North Atlantic Treaty Organization Operation Unified Protector with respect to Libya.”

Paul pointed out that if HR 2278 passes, “the president would be authorized to use US Armed Forces to engage in search and rescue; intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance; aerial refueling; and operational planning against Libya.” As of this time, without a declaration of war or congressional authorization, the president doesn’t have the authority to conduct these activities.

Paul also added that rejecting the Libya bill isn’t “necessary to prohibit the use of funds for US military attacks on Libya because those funds are already prohibited by the Constitution.” However, Paul acknowledged that, if given the opportunity, he would “support any straight and clean prohibition of funds.”

Earlier this week, Paul criticized President Obama’s explanation for the Libya War in a post titled “Strange Definitions of War and Peace.” Paul said that Obama’s reasoning for not seeking congressional approval before using the U.S. military in Libya was “laughable if not so horrific.”

Paul has always been candid about his opinion on the Libya War. On June 6, in a post titled “Holding the President Accountable on Libya,” Paul argued that “the president’s attack on Libya was unconstitutional and thus unlawful.” In the same column, Paul also said that “we are broke, and the American people know it. They expect Congress to focus on fixing America’s economic problems, rather than rubber stamping yet another open-ended military intervention in Libya.” In the same column, Paul also said that “the president’s attack on Libya was unconstitutional and thus unlawful. This policy must be reversed.” So far, Paul has done everything in his power to reverse the policy.

The White House conveyed Obama’s disappointment that HR 2278 failed to pass, saying “now is not the time to send the kind of mixed message that it sends when we are working with our allies to achieve the goals that we believe that are widely shared in Congress.”

 read more ...