WAR MONGER New World Order Gingrich is someone you don't want in power, if you care about your freedoms and libertys

Establishment gets desperate as Paul surges into lead in Iowa

Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
Monday, December 19, 2011

With the establishment terrified of Ron Paul’s snowballing success as he heads to the Iowa primary leading the Republican race, an onslaught of already debunked, agenda-driven, and desperate hit pieces have re-emerged.

Prime amongst them is an attempt to re-hash the ludicrous assertion that Ron Paul wrote racist newsletters in the early 1990′s when the material was clearly produced by other authors without Ron Paul knowing its content.

This is by no means a new story, it’s a debunked smear from four years ago that has been regurgitated by the same author, in unison with other neo-con hit pieces, right as Paul’s campaign peaks and polls show him leading in Iowa.

The re-hashed smear, entitled The Company Ron Paul Keeps – Meet Alex Jones, is written by The Weekly Standard’s James Kirchick, a man described by TIME Magazine’s Joe Klein as a “dishonest prick” and a “propagandist,” who “has opinions but no facts or experience”.

Kirchick is a proud neo-con who serves as a fellow with the Foundation for Defense of Democracies in Washington, an influential neo-conservative collective funded by numerous noted billionaires. The group’s list of “distinguished advisors” includes former CIA and FBI heads. The group is virtually a lobbying front for the state of Israel, which explains perfectly why Kirchick is so upset with Paul, who has promised to put a stop to the billions in foreign aid the United States sends to Israel every year.

Sitting on the group’s Leadership Council is none other than Newt Gingrich, one of Ron Paul’s main rivals in the Republican primary. Given that association, it’s unsurprising that Kirchick has chosen to dredge up his debunked smear at this key time in the election cycle, with Gingrich’s campaign now imploding and Ron Paul’s popularity surging.

Gingrich himself has more skeletons in the closet than a halloween costume shop, but that doesn’t stop Kirchick from playing the race card yet again in a transparent ploy to throw dirt at Ron Paul.

Kirchick dusts off his two decade old newsletters once more to allege that the racist comments were all written by Ron Paul or at least with his “endorsement”. This is akin to claiming that everything which appears on Infowars.com is written or endorsed by Alex Jones, or that every link which appears on DrudgeReport.com is the opinion of Matt Drudge himself.

Newsletters were the Internet of the early 1990′s. Dozens of newsletters with Ron Paul’s name in the title were published and thousands of articles were written by all manner of writers coming from all manner of different viewpoints, some legitimate, some not. To blame Ron Paul for the content of those newsletters is like blaming Free Republic for what its users post on its website. It’s guilt by association – the cheapest of dirty tricks.

Kirchick’s central claim is that Paul attacked Martin Luther King as a violent philanderer who “seduced underage girls and boys,” and that he criticized Ronald Reagan for signing legislation creating the federal holiday in his name, which Paul labeled “hate whitey day,” according to Kirchick.

In reality, Paul has noted King as one of his heroes on many occasions. Indeed, the only time that the Congressman has ever voted for something that is not explicitly authorized in the Constitution, it was for America to recognize Martin Luther King day as a public holiday.

The fact that, as Politifact documents, “in the late 1970s and early 1980s, (Paul) voted….to celebrate Martin Luther King Jr.’s birthday on the third Monday in January,” before any of the newsletters Kirchick cites were published, proves that the newsletters were written by other people and did not represent the views of Paul himself.

Indeed, the very publishers of many of the newsletters that Kirchick alludes to in his hit piece publicly admitted back in 2007 that Ron Paul had no influence over their content.

“Ron Paul didn’t know about those comments, or know they were written under his name until much later when they were brought to his attention. There were several issues that went out with comments that he would not ordinarily make. He was angry when he saw them,” said one publisher.

Just like leftists used hoax racist signs from their own rallies to discredit the Tea Party, Kirchick hand picks controversial comments that Ron Paul had no knowledge were being made in his name and attaches them to Paul’s campaign.

Kirchick reels off a handful of other outlandish claims and disingenuously implies Paul wrote them. Other supposedly “racist” writings are actually legitimate criticism of the state of Israel, including the manifestly provable fact that Mossad has operatives in countries around the world. Indeed, Mossad’s largest department is dedicated to conducting espionage overseas.

Notably absent from Kirchick’s regurgitation are accusations that were soundly debunked from the first incarnation of his hit piece. As we reported back in 2008, Kirchick referred to “the farcical “Stormfront Donation” saga which forced the New York Times to issue a retraction…admitting to several errors in a post it published which carried assertions that Ron Paul meets regularly with white supremacist groups.”

Following the first round of the smear in 2008, Austin NAACP President Nelson Linder publicly backed Ron Paul, saying he had known him for 20 years and that Paul was being attacked because he was a threat to the establishment.

The only people who seem to be upset at Ron Paul over racism are white, well to do, establishment Republican political operatives and journalists who are involved in lobbying groups with Newt Gingrich. Isn’t that interesting?

It’s also fascinating to note that Kirchick let slip in an email about the newsletters to Berin M. Szoka that he wrote the hit piece on Ron Paul not out of any moral outrage at Paul’s alleged “racism” but because he is “cynical” and enjoys “getting supporters of political candidates riled up”.

“That Jamie Kirchick was a self-aggrandizing pseudo-journalist with a personal agenda to gain attention cannot be denied. Nor can it be denied that the pseudo-journalists making issue of these newsletters in 2012 are just as irresponsible and intellectually dishonest as Kirchick was in 2008,” writes Brett MacDonald.

Kirchick then throws in the name of Alex Jones seemingly out of leftfield. I can only surmise that this is an attempt to get traffic or attract attention. Kirchick’s tone seems to be a whining lament about how the first incarnation of his smear didn’t get enough play the first time around.

Again he resorts to guilt by association, upset at the fact that Ron Paul has appeared on Alex Jones’ show.

Kirchick treats Jones’ assertion (and Ron Paul’s agreement) that NORTHCOM is involved in a military takeover of the country as a “conspiracy theory,” even as the U.S. Senate passes a bill that would allow the military to kidnap and intern Americans in detention camps without trial, and even as the Washington Post reports how Northcom has dispatched 20,000 troops to aid in “domestic security” inside the United States.

Kirchick then cites Jones’ Endgame documentary and alleges that Jones claims there is a “secret plot of George Pataki, David Rockefeller, and Queen Beatrix, among other luminaries, to exterminate humanity and transform themselves into “superhuman” computer hybrids able to “travel throughout the cosmos.”

As anyone who has actually bothered to watch the documentary will know, the “secret plot” which Kirchick is seemingly afraid to mention is called the Bilderberg Group. It’s no secret, the group meets every year to further their agenda for global government (the mere mention of the Bilderberg Group was described as an “out there conspiracy theory” by Kirchick back in 2008). The elite’s desire for superhuman status is no conspiracy theory dreamed up by Jones either, it’s one that’s openly romanticized by the super-rich and elite technology gurus like Ray Kurzweil.

You’d think that Kirchick and his ilk would have learned their lesson by now. Even back in 2008, the racist smear was quickly swiped aside by the Paul campaign, but the attack dogs returned in 2010, this time going after Rand Paul in an effort to prevent him becoming Kentucky Senator. But ridiculous tales about the ‘Aqua Buddha’ and allegations of Rand Paul kidnapping women were quickly proven to be no more than grossly exaggerated college pranks from 30 years previously. Paul won by a landslide.

Recycling debunked and tired old garbage about Ron Paul being “racist” when he is the only Republican candidate not to advocate killing more brown people in broken-backed third world countries to “protect America” just isn’t going to work.

As one respondent wrote in response to Kirchick’s hit piece back in 2008 (it applies more than ever today), “That’s the problem Ron Paul presents to those trying to smear him, you have to go back 20 years and try to twist somebody else’s words to try to make him look bad. With all the other candidates you can just look at what they themselves have actually been doing in the recent past and even the present.”

Indeed, the neo-con establishment peanut gallery on which Kirchick is proudly perched is now so discredited that top-down attacks on Ron Paul will only aid him in cultivating his substantive image as the only genuine alternative to the Washington establishment that has corrupted and bankrupted America.

RELATED: Vicious Ron Paul Hit Piece Scrapes The Barrel Of Yellow Journalism (our original rebuttal to Kirchick’s smear attack from 2008).

HEADLINE NEWS LINKS

1. New York Times Parrots Debunked Poplawski Smear
2. MSNBC In Pathetic “Racist” Prison Planet Smear
3. Conspiracy against Ron Paul
4. Poplawski Smear Debunked: Cop Killer Held Opposing Views To Infowars
5. Liberal Journalist Continues Parroting Debunked Smear on Alex Jones
6. Media Smeared Paul For Racism, Ignored McCain’s “Gook” Comments
7. Rand Paul Survives Smear Campaign To Maintain Healthy Lead Over Conway
8. Analysts And Democrats Slam Attack On Rand Paul, Washington Post Persists With Smear
9. Rand Paul Extends Lead Over Conway Despite Racism Smear
10. Rand Paul Strikes Back At Mainstream Media Smear Machine
11. Rand Paul Surges Ahead Of Conway Despite Stomp Smear
12. The Establishment Media Smear Machine Is Officially Dead

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
May 28, 2011

Appearing at the globalist confab in the French resort of Deauville, Obama said on Friday the U.S. and NATO will not rest until they “finish the job’ in Libya.

Obama’s ping pong partner, British PM David Cameron, said it is time to “ratchet up” pressure on Gaddafi. In other words, Cameron called for more NATO bombing and more death in order to convince Gaddafi to leave the country as the globalists demand.

“Gaddafi and the Libyan government have failed to fulfill their responsibility to protect the Libyan population and have lost all legitimacy,” declared French president Nicolas Sarkozy in a statement. “He has no future in a free, democratic Libya. He must go.”

In March, British Defense Secretary Liam Fox admitted NATO plans to assassinate Gaddafi. Unable to do so, the coalition settled for slaughtering members of his family in Mafia vendetta fashion. On May 1, it was reported that a “precision air strike” had killed Gaddafi’s youngest son, Saif Al-Arab, and three of his grandsons.

Former African presidents, including South Africa’s Thabo Mbeki and Nigeria’s Olusegun Obasanjo, have expressed “grave concern” that NATO’s campaign to change the government in Libya with violence continues. The African Union shares the belief that what is taking place now goes beyond the scope of [UN resolutions] 1970 and 1973,” said Ramtane Lamamra, the AU’s Peace and Security Commissioner.

Obama’s announcement that the aggression against Libya will be opened-ended is at odds with earlier statements. On March 21, he said the military operations against Libya would be “limited in their nature, duration, and scope” and in the service of a “limited and well-defined mission.” A few days later, on March 28, Obama said “the United States will play a supporting role” in the effort to violently changed Libya’s government.

NATO’s war in Africa and the lead role assumed by the United States has now exceeded the time limit supposedly imposed by the War Powers Resolution. On May 20, Obama was required by this law – itself a violation of the Constitution (only Congress can declare war) – to ask for congressional authorization to continue the slaughter in Libya, but he ignored it.

In fact, Obama stonewalled Congress on the extension and “canceled without explanation” a committee briefing on Libya by the vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and declined the committee’s request that a Defense Department official testify at another hearing.

U.S. operations “have assumed a different character than you suggested when you announced the decision to initiate them,” an irate Sen. Richard Lugar said in a letter to Obama.

Once again, an arrogant American president has misled the nation and thumbed his nose at Congress and the American people as he follows the orders of the globalists who are inclined to take out disfavored opponents in Mafia fashion.

Gaddafi’s behavior toward the people of the country – a substantial number who in fact support him – and the vow to remove him have nothing to do with humanitarianism or democracy United Nations style. It has to do with getting rid of Gaddafi the same way the globalists got rid of Saddam Hussein. Gaddafi has not bowed and scraped to the IMF and the World Banksters, so he has to go. Gaddafi’s pledge to create an African investment bank, an African monetary fund and an African central bank was the last straw for the money masters as they forge ahead with a plan to fold Africa into the one-world agenda.

Minus a small contingent in Congress, led by Rep. Dennis Kucinich, most Democrats and Republicans support Obama’s illegal and immoral war against the people of Libya. Below the surface, however, discontent over Obama’s Libya campaign for the globalists is brewing.

“In electing Obama, his supporters thought that there would be an end to the wars in the Middle East. But Americans are still mopping up in Iraq and still engaged in combat with the Taliban in Afghanistan. And now Obama has launched a third Middle Eastern war, this time against Gaddafi,” op-ed writer Mark Whittington pointed out on March 21.

Unfortunately, many of Obama’s supporters are out of touch with reality. Obama, like most politicians, will say whatever is required in order to get the vote. Obama, as a creature of the Democrat party establishment and its masters on Wall Street and the globalists at the United Nations, never seriously intended to end the illegal wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. He has received orders to enlarge them.

For the globalists, war is forever and Obama has expanded mass murder in Pakistan and Libya. In 2012, Democrats will be forced to pull the lever for Obama again or leave the party and either vote independent or not at all.

Despite what is being reported, the invasion of Libya has already begun. Units operating on Libyan territory for a long time have prepared the war and are carrying out the assault: they are the powerful oil companies and U.S. and European investment banks.

Manlio Dinucci
Global Research
May 2, 2011

Global Research extends its thanks and appreciation to John Catalinotto for the translation of this article.

Despite what is being reported, the invasion of Libya has already begun. Units operating on Libyan territory for a long time have prepared the war and are carrying out the assault: they are the powerful oil companies and U.S. and European investment banks.

What interests are at stake emerged from an article in the Wall Street Journal, the influential business and finance daily newspaper (“For West’s Oil Firms, No Love Lost in Libya”). After the lifting of sanctions in 2003, Western oil companies flocked to Libya with high expectations; they have been disappointed by the results. The Libyan government, under a system known as EPSA-4, granted operating licenses to foreign companies that left the Libyan state company (National Oil Corporation of Libya, NOC) with the highest percentage of the extracted oil: given the strong competition, it came to about 90 percent. “The EPSA-4 contracts contained the toughest terms in the world,” says Bob Fryklund, former president of the U.S.-based ConocoPhillips in Libya. (WSJ)

It is apparent then, because — with an operation decided not in Bengazi, but in Washington, London and Paris — the National Transitional Council has created the “Libyan Oil Company.” This is an empty shell, much like one of those companies that are ready key in hand for investors in tax havens. It is intended to replace Libya’s National Oil Company (NOC) when the “willing” have taken control of oil fields. Its task will be to grant licenses on terms highly favorable to U.S., British and French companies. On the other hand, it would prefer to make the companies suffer that before the war were the main producers of oil in Libya: first of all the Italian firm ENI, which in 2007 paid a billion dollars to obtain concessions until 2042, and Germany’s Wintershall, which came in second place. It would make Chinese and Russian companies suffer even more, those to which on March 14 Gaddafi promised he would transfer the oil concessions held by European and U.S. companies. The plans of the “willing” also include the privatization of state-owned company, which would be imposed by the International Monetary Fund in return for “aid” to rebuild the industries and infrastructure destroyed by the bombing the same “willing” countries carried out.

It is also clear why the “Central Bank of Libya,” was created in Benghazi at the same time; it’s another empty shell but its important future task will be to formally manage the Libyan sovereign funds — over $150 billion that the Libyan state had invested abroad — once they are “unfrozen” by the United States and the major European powers. The British banking giant HSBC demonstrated who will effectively manage them. HSBC is the main “guardian” of the Libyan investment “frozen” in Britain (around 25 billion Euro): a team of senior officials from HSBC is already at work in Bengazi to launch the new “Central Bank of Libya.” It will be easy for HSBC and other large investment banks to orient Libyan investment according to their own strategies.

One of their goals is to sink the African Union’s financial institutions, whose birth was made possible largely by Libyan investment. These include the African Investment Bank, based in Tripoli, Libya; the African Central Bank, based in Abuja, Nigeria; the African Monetary Fund, based in Yaoundé, Cameroon. The latter, with a capital programs pf more than 40 billion dollars, could supplant the International Monetary Fund in Africa. Up to now the IMF has dominated the African economy, paving the way for multinationals and investment banks in the U.S. and Europe. By attacking Libya, the “willing” are trying to sink the bodies that could one day make the financial independence of Africa possible.

(Il Manifesto, May 1, 2011)

Voice of Russia | NATO has begun “a hunt for Gaddafi with the aim of eliminating him”, reported the British Sky News TV channel.

BBC | Silvio Berlusconi has approved the use of his country’s air force in Nato’s Libya mission.

‘Give up now or we’ll kill you,’ Liam Fox warns Gaddafi as he starts talks with U.S. on widening scope of airstrikes

Defence Secretary Liam Fox will meet senior U.S. commanders today to draw up a final plan to finish Colonel Gaddafi.

US tipped off about al-Qaida cell that did not exist

The US military created a detailed intelligence file on a London-based al-Qaida cell that did not exist, as a result of its reliance on tip-offs from one of its detainees, the Guantánamo files reveal.

‘Al Qaeda Bomber Worked For UK Intelligence’

An al Qaeda “assassin” accused of bombing Christian churches and a luxury hotel in Pakistan was working for British intelligence at the same time, according to leaked files.

Guantánamo Bay files: Casio wristwatch ‘the sign of al-Qaida’

It is cheap, basic and widely available around the world. Yet the Casio F-91W digital watch was declared to be “the sign of al-Qaida” and a contributing factor to continued detention of prisoners by the analysts stationed at Guantánamo Bay.

Flashback: Meet the world’s most dangerous terrorists
Flashback: Military Denial Of Torture At Gitmo Is The Sickest Joke

James Ball
London Guardian
April 25, 2011

It is cheap, basic and widely available around the world. Yet the Casio F-91W digital watch was declared to be “the sign of al-Qaida” and a contributing factor to continued detention of prisoners by the analysts stationed at Guantánamo Bay.

Briefing documents used to train staff in assessing the threat level of new detainees advise that possession of the F-91W – available online for as little as £4 – suggests the wearer has been trained in bomb making by al-Qaida in Afghanistan.

The report states: “The Casio was known to be given to the students at al-Qaida bomb-making training courses in Afghanistan at which the students received instruction in the preparation of timing devices using the watch.

Full article here

Britain, the Traitor Nation: Media Disinformation and Crimes against Humanity in Libya

The vultures wheel over Libya beside the drones but roasted carrion is not their usual feast. The flag of the Kingdom of Libya is being waved in victory.

Dr. David Halpin
Global Research
April 25, 2011

“All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations…Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state or shall require the Members to submit such matters to settlement under the present Charter.” UN Charter – 1: Purposes and Principles http://www.un.org/en/documents/charter/chapter1.shtml

The vultures wheel over Libya beside the drones but roasted carrion is not their usual feast. The flag of the Kingdom of Libya is being waved in victory. The jubilant rebels have decided on discretion rather than valour. The charred skeletons of the government tank crew have been left below and cannot join the party. Perhaps the celebrants know that the ‘coalition’ dispense U238 as liberally as their illusory democracy.

The royalist flag raised in victory before the human remnants are removed
The vultures scent the sweet crude and see all that easy land for US bases banished by Ghaddafi.

These predators are being assisted, as per usual, by the State Broadcaster (BBC) with Channel 4 close behind.

Tanks are being ‘taken out’ but never, never are the crews within mentioned by the news readers.

The significance of these olive skinned humans are as grains of sand. But it is over in a flash. ’So humane, so why refer to the brothers and the fathers?’ A millisecond or two after the armour is punctured by uranium depleted of U235 alone, the fireball cremates the crew within a few more milliseconds.

The minute solid particles resulting from combustion of the U238 with its infinite half life of 4.5 billion years rise in the thermals above the blistered tank. Some will settle, and some will stay in the air at all levels, eventually dispersing in every direction. Inhalation will ensure the most intimate contact with the cells of all mammals. The ionizing radiation of the germ cells in ovary or testis will lead to birth deformity as witnessed as an epidemic by the mothers and doctors in Fallujah.

The plans for the evisceration of Libya were long laid by the vultures. The myxoma virus of the blackest of black propaganda is being squirted into the nervous systems of homo non-sapiens to allow many to believe the process is benign. ’We are aiding revolution and saving Arabs from themselves’. The State Broadcaster leads the mega-wattage and is fed by serried ranks of able liars in the FCO, the Downing Street Media Unit and the Ministry of ‘Defence’. Lying has is now our heavy industry in blood soaked Albion.

The joint statement of Obama, Cameron and Sarkozy – “For that transition to succeed, Colonel Ghaddafi must go, and go for good. At that point, the United Nations and its members should help the Libyan people as they rebuild where Ghaddafi has destroyed — to repair homes and hospitals, ….”

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/opinion/columnists/article2986866.ece

Did they say rebuild the hospitals and medical services that 12 years of sanctions and Shock and Aweing destroyed in Iraq?

Every evil allegation is heaped on Muamar and his army. Three cluster bombs were used in Misrata. The allegation was backed up by Human Rights Watch but its chief executive, Kenneth Roth, has already shown his partisanship towards the ‘rabbles’. ’The Security Council has at last lived up to its duty’.

http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2011/03/18/security-council-has-last-lived-its-duty Bouckaert, another HRW representative, had given weight to the alleged gang rape of Eman Al-Obeidi. This distressed lady had aired her claim before a room full of foreign journalists. Channel 4 showed the segment two nights running. It would be unusual for such a terrible crime to take place in a nation where 97% are Muslims, and rare also for the victim to shout about it to a crowd. How did Bouckaert come to an opinion on Eman?

As for the three cluster bombs read this by Craig Murray. Our ex-ambassador to Uzbekistan, who ‘outed’ the most grotesque torture of devout Muslims for ‘intelligence’ which flowed to Langley and thence to MI6, records how the US has the largest stocks of cluster bombs and that it has resisted joining the cluster bomb ban. The UK, with its usual treachery, has signed but agrees to hold stocks for the US on this sceptred isle. The use of thousands by ‘Israel’ on the Lebanese people in 2006 is not recalled by the UK media. http://craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2011/04/clusters-of-hypocrisy/

This morning, the funereal sounding Orla Guerin, spoke of one hundred rebel injuries and several deaths. Again the government forces and civilians had no mention. Death and injury is not their lot. She said that they were ‘exhausted by death’ in Misrata. The pilots of the British Typhoons, Tornadoes and French Mirages were not exhausted so by death. Their very accurate ‘fire and forget’ missiles erased only concrete and metal. Thus there are no loyal Libyan deaths.

The State Broadcaster has been very selective in its news dissemination. Aware that our premier liar has promised ‘no boots on the ground’, it has been careful to maintain that illusion. There has been no national news of ‘deployment’. (They are good on sanitary words – ‘ in theatre’, ‘operational tasking’ These are fragments of the public school lexicon of killing.) But here, in the South West of England, BBC Southwest has been spilling the beans. It reckons that almost every local will know warships have been embarking Royal Marines in Plymouth. However, we were told they were going in case ‘humanitarian help’ was needed in Libya and, rather darkly, for the possible evacuation of UK citizens from other Middle Eastern countries in event of disturbance or similar. The video showed troops loading humanitarian rocket launchers. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-devon-12995065

The MoD said the newly-formed Response Force Task Group (RFTG) would be taking part in multi-national amphibious exercises in the Mediterranean and later in the Indian Ocean.

HMS Albion, Type 23 frigate HMS Sutherland, and the Royal Fleet Auxiliary Cardigan Bay were sailing as the lead element of the RFTG, which is held at “very high readiness” to respond to “unexpected global events”.

HMS Albion, a landing platform dock capable of carrying more than 600 people, left Devonport just after 0800 BST 14 April. A closer look at Albion at sea -

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11491132

Task group commander, Cmdr John Kingwell, said: “Cougar 11 is an important opportunity to develop international inter-operability and build long-term defence relationships, and for the RFTG to demonstrate operational contingent capability.” (We are used to gold braid bullshit.)

The MoD said the ships and troops from Taunton-based 40 Commando would be there “to develop and demonstrate contingent capability for UK defence – in effect, the ability to respond to short-notice tasking across a diverse range of defence activities such as disaster relief, humanitarian aid, or amphibious operations”.

Devonport-based submarine HMS Triumph has just returned to the base after operations against pro-Gaddafi forces. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-devon-12976115

Cdr Rob Dunn said: “I am proud of my ship’s company. They went about their duty and carried out all I asked of them in the most professional way.

“They are naturally satisfied that they carried out an operational tasking using our Tomahawk land attack missiles weapon system, which does not happen very often, but for which they are highly trained and prepared for at any time.”

Whilst ships, men and ammunition were rapidly loaded at Devonport Plymouth, Royal Fleet Auxiliary Largs Bay was loading at Hythe dock in Southampton Water.

The dock is supplied by its own railway so the munitions are kept away from the proles who pay for them. BBC South also kept the public in ignorance of happenings in Hythe. There is only a village nearby, and the oil refinery of course!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RFA_Largs_Bay_(L3006)

These benign activities are all to do with Operation Cougar at the perfidious Albion end. They are alleged to have been 2 years in the planning. One function, according to the Ministry of Truth and ‘Defence’, is “preventing conflict.” ’ These units have now deployed and have been selected for their ability to remain on task for as long as is required.’ “More units will sail to join the lead elements later this year.”

support/operations/auriga/news/cougar_11_vanguard_s.htm

These are all the elementsof the Response Force Task Group:-

Landing Platform Dock (LPD) HMS Ocean Landing Platform Helicopter (LPH) HMS Liverpool Type 42 Destroyer HMS Sutherland Type 23 Frigate HMS Triumph Trafalgar Class Submarine RFA Argus Aviation Training and Casualty Receiving Ship RFA Mounts Bay Landing Platform RFA Cardigan BayLanding Platform HMS Albion Oil Replenisher RFA Fort Rosalie 40 Cdo Royal Marines 539 Assault Squadron Royal Marines The Armoured Support Group Two Lynx Mk 9 Helicopters from Joint Helicopter Command Two Sea King Mk4 Helicopters from Joint Helicopter Command One Lynx Helicopter from 815 Naval Air Squadron

The very big supremo of the NATO ‘peace keeping’ and civilian saving force is Canadian Lieutenant-General Charles Bouchard. He has studied ‘defence’ in the US of A and it shows.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-13125616

“The head of Nato in Libya, Lieutenant-General Charles Bouchard, said Col Gaddafi’s forces had employed what he called underhand and immoral tactics in their seven-week drive to dislodge the rebels from the city.

‘Inside the city it’s a very difficult tough situation. The Gaddafi forces have taken their uniforms off, they’re hiding on rooftops of mosques, hospitals, schools, that’s where their heavy equipment is positioned, near mosques, near schools, and they’re shielding themselves with women and children.

So when people ask me why aren’t you doing something, well I’m not going to lower to his level. I’m not going to do the kind of warfare that he’s doing. My job’s to help the population,” he said, in an interview with the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation.”

We can visualise there are at least 50 vessels standing for freedom in the eastern Mediterranean, including at least one USS nuclear powered and nuclear armed aircraft carrier. There will be at least 10 submarines.

The buzzard sees the humans crawling on the earth below and he mews

“What though the spicy breezes blow soft o’er Ceylon’s isle;

Though every prospect pleases, and only man is vile?” Heber

The cuckoo is quiet and sitting tight. But the wires are busy – Bibi to Hillary to ‘I am a Zionist’ Cameron to Sarkozy. Bibi knows of fellow ‘Israeli’ Oded Yinon who in the 80′s studied how the Arab entities might be destabilized and divided into digestible pieces. (See Ralph Schoenman’s ‘The Hidden History of Zionism’ Chapter 12. It is most revealing.) So things are going pretty well.

The actual axis of evil is very busy. One pole, the dominant one, is in Tel Aviv. The other pole is Washington. In the middle is London, and now Paris.

London gives the axis propriety with all the flummery. It also gives its cunning and its historical knowledge of imperialism. The power shifts backward and forward along that axis as busily as those jets carrying the psychopaths who pull the triggers.

Whilst Colonel Mu’ammar al-Qadhafi waits for his high explosive execution, (NATO bombed a bunker in central Tripoli last night) read his long, coherent speech to that sham of shams, the United Nations.

http://www.mathaba.net/news/?x=626459 Certainly not a member of that axis of evil.

That UN was formed in some sort of hope after yet another war to end wars. Have Cameron, Sarkozy, Obama and the rest of the murderous gang read this?

“All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations…Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state or shall require the Members to submit such matters to settlement under the present Charter.”

UN Charter – 1: Purposes and Principles
http://www.un.org/en/documents/charter/chapter1.shtml

Libya: western leaders call for Nato to target Gaddafi

Senior western leaders called for Nato to adopt an assassination policy against Col Muammar Gaddafi to salvage the bombing campaign in Libya from a descent into stalemate.

Toby Harnden,
London Telegraph
April 25, 2011

Senior western leaders called for Nato to adopt an assassination policy against Col Muammar Gaddafi to salvage the bombing campaign in Libya from a descent into stalemate.

The calls came as Col Gaddafi was reported to have strengthened his grip on power by repatriating billions of dollars in overseas assets that should have been frozen by UN sanctions.

On Sunday, there was growing pressure on Coalition forces to directly target Col Gaddafi with military strikes.

Senator Lindsey Graham, a Republican member of the Senate Armed Services committee, said that the quickest way to end the emerging stalemate was to “cut the head of the snake off”. He said: “The people around Gaddafi need to wake up every day wondering, ‘Will this be my last?’

Full article here

Tony Cartalucci
Prison Planet.com
Monday, April 25, 2011

Bangkok, Thailand, April 25, 2011 – Peddling a policy that includes assassinating the leader of a sovereign nation, besieged under blatantly false pretenses, sets a dangerous precedent that may backfire in the faces of the arrogant men calling for it. Lindsey Graham and John McCain, both of the meddling International Republican Institute implicated in funding and fueling the “Arab Spring” to begin with, have called for the assassination of Libya’s Qaddafi and members of his inner circle. The London Telegraph also reported that Foreign Secretary William Hague refused to rule out using US drones to assassinate Qaddafi.

With the US now openly admitting to recruiting, training, funding, and equipping armies of “activists” to go back and subvert their nations’ governments, and with China and a growing list of other nations pointing the finger for fueling subversion directly at Washington, the global scope of this operation and the meddling hands behind are exposed for the whole world to see. What comes next will be a series of proxy conflicts of increasing violence. It is quite clear that humanitarian concerns are entirely contrived excuses propelling this global campaign along. As this facade of legitimacy crumbles, the imperialist nature of the aggression becomes more overt and we now see what looks more like the opening salvos of World War III than a “wave of democracy” sweeping the world.

Should Syria fall to Western-funded and fueled subversion, Iran will undoubtedly be next. The stakes for Russia and China will be raised still higher, and Iran itself will be backed into a corner it hasn’t been in since the brutal and protracted Iran-Iraq War of the 80s. Should the West succeed in assassinating Qaddafi after this regional campaign of naked aggression, they will open the door for similar calls to be made against them by a world awake to their reckless, gluttonous tyranny.

Nation-states could repay the threat in kind

When the violence escalates, do these leaders in America feel confident enough that the people they supposedly lead will come to their aid when calls are made in turn for their heads? Do they really believe the people of America will be galvanized by foreign nations surgically retaliating against these increasingly unpopular figures? Would the world miss or mourn the loss of the bankers, industrialists, geopolitical power brokers or the myriad of other jackals, rats, and cockroaches that hide in the dark of elitist power? Would the average American, many of whom have never heard their names, even make a whimper in protest?

The global elite should tread lightly indeed, for they have created a public who does not see them and will not miss them once they are gone. A skillful nation may decide to leave the feckless buffer of pandering politicians intact, and instead target the corporate-financier oligarchs themselves. These oligarchs may be under the delusion they have nothing to lose, for it is the people that bleed and go bankrupt in their contrived wars, but the reality is that the world has nothing to lose by looking past the battlefields and politics that are bleeding them dry, and into the eyes of the true tormentors of humanity. Russia has already thrown degenerate global elitist Mikhail Khodorkovsky into a Siberian prison, proving that the globalists do have much to lose and are entirely powerless when finally confronted by those who know their game.

Full-spectrum resistance

While it is up to nation-states to decide the execution of force against this now apparent global menace, we as individuals must concentrate on removing and replacing their tentacles in our local communities. From developing our own forms of private currency, to trading and bartering, to growing a simple garden or learning a trade, we can begin eroding the power from which such arrogance is expressed. And while nation-states can use force to swat down these parasites, we the people can begin draining the swamps of ignorance and needy dependence amongst us that have allowed them to flourish for so long.

For decades the global corporate-financier oligarchs have waged full-spectrum war against humanity, the nation-state, the community, the family, and the individual. It is time to face them with full-spectrum resistance.

Corporate Media Refuses to Report Truth About NATO Contras in Libya - Infowars.com | Like the attack on Iraq, the attack on Libya is based on a series of lies and fabrications.

April 24, 2011

Like the attack on Iraq, the attack on Libya is based on a series of lies and fabrications. Reports have surfaced accusing the NATO Contras – as the British political activist Sukant Chandan calls them – of murdering black Africans, accusations the corporate media will not touch with a ten foot pole. Chandan went to Libya and was able to document civilians killed by NATO bombs. The establishment media refuses to report any of this. Meanwhile, the U.S. and NATO prepare a ground invasion.

 

Al Qaida Obama Targets Libyans with Deadly Predator Drones - Kurt Nimmo | In 2009 alone, CIA operated Predator drones killed 700 civilians in Pakistan.Obama has authorized the use of deadly predator drones in Libya. During a news conference, Secretary of Defense Gates said the drones offer NATO more precise targeting against enemy forces nestled in crowded areas.

Kurt Nimmo
Prison Planet.com
Friday, April 22, 2011

Obama has authorized the use of deadly predator drones in Libya. During a news conference, Secretary of Defense Gates said the drones offer NATO more precise targeting against enemy forces nestled in crowded areas.

“This is good news for the Libyan rebels who have been complaining about NATO’s lack of support in recent days,” writes Michael Hughes for the Examiner.

It is not so good news for Libyan civilians. In 2009 alone, CIA operated Predator drones killed around 700 civilians in the tribal area of Pakistan.

“The true civilian fatality rate since 2004 according to our analysis is approximately 32 per cent,” said the Washington-based New America Foundation last March. A report released by the organization, The Year of the Drone, studied 114 drone raids in which more than 1200 people were killed. Of those, between 549 and 849 were reliably reported to be militant fighters, while the rest were civilians, the London Telegraph reported.

The illegal campaign began under Bush and escalated after Obama assumed office. There were 45 drone attacks during Bush’s two terms. In Obama’s first year alone, there were 51 attacks.

In recent months, Pakistani civilians have taken to the street to protest against the relentless attacks. In April, the Pentagon said it would continue the attacks despite official complaint from Islamabad. “Panetta (CIA chief) has an obligation to protect this country and he’s not going to halt any operations that accomplish that objective,” said Obama officials.

In September of 2010, the CIA “drastically increased its bombing campaign,” according to the New York Times. The escalation included attacks by U.S. military helicopters. In October, the U.S. apologized for a helicopter attack that killed two Pakistani soldiers at an outpost near the Afghan border.

Gaddafi’s opponents applauded the introduction of Predator drones into the engineered conflict. “We are so pleased,” media liaison official for the rebels’ Transitional National Council (TNC), Mustafa Gheriani, told AFP in Benghazi. “We hope that this can bring some relief to the people in Misrata.”

On Friday, former presidential candidate and Arizona senator John McCain arrived in Benghazi. “The American people support you very strongly and we know it’s necessary to help as much as we can,” McCain told a crowd of about 100 Libyans, the UPI reports.

In March, polls revealed that the American people do not support attacking Libya. Following Obama’s national address on his Libya policy earlier this month, a Pew Research poll indicated that 57% of Americans believe the U.S. policy lacks a clear goal, up from 50% who said the same thing a week earlier.

McCain is the ranking member of the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee. He has advocated increasing military strikes against the African country in order to remove its leader, Moammar Gaddafi, who was on track to normalizing relations with the United States prior to the color revolutions instigated in the Middle East.

In 2009, Gaddafi sunk any chance to repair its diplomatic relationship with the United States when he announced he was considering nationalizing the country’s oil. “Oil should be owned by the State at this time, so we could better control prices by the increase or decrease in production,” the dictator declared.

In addition to calling for nationalization, the Libyan leader called for support of his proposal to dismantle the government and to distribute the oil wealth directly to Libya’s 5 million citizens.

---

Libyan War Gets Weird: Defending the Indefensible - Even those who have studied for years the criminal consolidation of this planet under the global corporate-financier oligarchy may be noticing that the war in Libya is turning into something new and unprecedented.

Tony Cartalucci
Prisonplanet.com
April 21, 2011

Even those who have studied for years the criminal consolidation of this planet under the global corporate-financier oligarchy may be noticing that the war in Libya is turning into something new and unprecedented. The lies and propaganda have hit an all time high and no article encapsulates this better than the bizarre, grotesque piece out of the New York Times titled, “Inferior Arms Hobble Rebels in Libya War.”

In it, the glorious, heroic rebels are described as under-armed, which has caused them to use weapons such as landmines and rockets that indiscriminately target civilians and government troops alike. They wield knives that they, “want to stuff into Qaddafi’s heart,”and 400 rifles sent by Qatar in direct violation of the arms embargo included in UNSC r.1973.

Perhaps this macabre, suspicious article is trying to excuse reports now coming out indicating that the Libyan rebels, who themselves admit ties to Al-Qaeda, are reportedlybutchering, beheading, and mutilating captured government troops and now guilty of employing the same weapons and tactics NATO has accused Qaddafi of using – the very justification used by NATO to enter the war in the first place. The New York Times indeed attempts to excuse these various grisly reports, by stating that the, “rebels have little evident command-and-control and no clear or consistent rules of engagement — factors that have perhaps contributed to instances of abusive or outright brutal conduct.”

The rebels’ use of child-soldiers is also shamefully brushed aside by the New York Times as an afterthought along with “credible accounts of rebels beating and robbing African men on the mere suspicion of their being mercenaries,” and a report from April 9th where two journalists “observed rebels capture and immediately kill a suspected Qaddafi informant.”

Outrageously, the New York Times continues by describing the rebels’ use of high explosive, indiscriminate weapons fire that mirrors their own accusations made (and heeded unquestionable by the West) against Qaddafi. The article acknowledges that even though the rebel leadership in Benghazi, described ad nauseum by the corporate media as ” lawyers, professors and teachers,” has denied that their fighters would reuse landmines captured from Qaddafi’s arsenal, BBC had video taped them blatantly laying these mines near the city of Ajdabiya.

After reading this litany of blatant war crimes, and what seems to describe the opening scenes of yet another genocide presided over by the UN, the New York Times concludes with ambiguous rhetoric, stating that “to watch Libyan rebels head to battle is to watch young men calling for freedom step toward a bloody mismatch, and often their deaths. To arm them, though, is to assume other risks, some of which could last for years.”

Quite obviously Libya’s rebels are turning out to be “less than heroic,” and groups of them as morally bankrupt and depraved on record as Qaddafi was accused of being without a shred of evidence. To attempt to convince the public that democracy and freedom can spring from an army employing extra-judicial executions, indiscriminate military force, and the use of child-soldiers is a dubious proposition indeed. To suggest that American or European blood and money be spent to intervene on behalf of armed militants Qaddafi seems more than justified defending himself and his people against, is in fact, entirely criminal.

Now, the US has granted 25 million USD for “non-lethal” aid to bolster forces admittedly engaged in war crimes, with further aid being currently worked out including additional arms shipments. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton continues to insist that the rebel movement was “a spontaneous response within the context of the broader Arab spring,” a blatant, willful lie. These rebels have been funded and supported by the United States and United Kingdom in particular for nearly 30 years. The “Arab Spring” itself is now admittedly the work of US funded opposition that had been groomed for at least 3 years leading up to the regional upheaval.

In the face of such evidence mounting from both critics of the ongoing war and now the corporate media in an attempt to spin it, even the casual reader must call into question the official narrative given regarding the increasingly bizarre war in Libya, and the seemingly unhinged minds leading the people of the West deeper into it.

---

Lies about the war on Libya - It has been said that truth is the first casualty of war. The Libyan military operations and Resolution 1973, which functions as their legal basis, are not an exception to the rule.

 

Thierry Meyssan
Global Research
April 21, 2011

It has been said that truth is the first casualty of war. The Libyan military operations and Resolution 1973, which functions as their legal basis, are not an exception to the rule. These are presented to the public as a necessary measure to protect the civilian population against indiscriminate repression at the hands of Colonel Gaddafi. In reality they are classic imperial goals. Let us look at the following elements for clarification.

Crimes Against Humanity

To paint a black picture of the situation, the Atlanticist press pretended that the hundreds of thousands of people who were fleeing from Libya were doing so to escape from a massacre. Press agencies reported on thousands of deaths and spoke of “crimes against humanity“. Resolution 1970referred to the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court “the widespread and systematic attacks against the civilian population“.

In fact, the Libyan conflict can be read both in political terms and from a tribal perspective. Immigrant workers were the first to fall victim, being brutally forced to leave the country. The clashes between Gaddafi’s supporters and the insurrection have certainly been bloody, but never in the purported proportions. There has never been a systematic repression against civilian population.

Support for the “Arab Spring”

During his speech before the Security Council, French Foreign Minister Alain Juppé sang the praises of the “Arab Spring” in general and the Libyan insurrection in particular.

His lyrical speech cloaked dark intentions. Juppé didn’t utter a single word about the bloody repressions in Yemen and Bahrain, yet he paid tribute to King Mohamed VI of Morocco as if he were one of the revolutionary agents of change [1] thus contributing to worsen France’s already disastrous image in the Arab world thanks to the President Sarkozy.

Support from the African Union and the Arab League

Since the beginning of these events, France, Great Britain and the United States have persisted in denying the fact that this is a West-sponsored war, although French Interior Minister Claude Guéant did refer to Nicolas Sarkozy’s “crusade“ [2].

The three countries in question brought into play the alleged support from the African Union and from the Arab League. In reality, however, the African Union condemned the repression and recognised the legitimacy of the democratic claims but invariably pronounced itself against a foreign armed intervention [4]. According to the Bulgarian authorities, this is the same character who arranged for the torture of the Bulgarian nurses and the Palestinian medic that were held by the Libyan regime for an extended period of time.

By recognizing the Libyan National Transitional Council and absolving its new president, the Western coalition picked their own interlocutors and foisted them on the rebels as their leaders. This enabled the coalition to weed out the revolutionary nasserists, khomeinists and communists.

The coalition’s aim was to be ahead of the game and avoid what had happened in Tunisia and Egypt when they imposed a government tied to the official Party without Ben Ali or a Suleiman government without Mubarak, both of which were also ousted by the revolutionaries in the end.

Arms Embargo

If the objective were to protect the population, the embargo would have been crafted to target the mercenaries and the weapons funneled to the Gaddafi regime. Instead, the embargo was extended to the rebels to prevent any possible victory. Therefore, this is obviously about stopping the revolution in its tracks.

No flight zone

If the objective were to protect the civilian population, the no-fly zone would have been limited to the rebel territory (as was done in Iraq with Kurdistan). In fact, the restriction affects the entire national territory. In this way the coalition hopes to maintain the balance of power between the forces on the ground and divide the country in 4 areas: the 3 rebel areas and the area loyal to Gaddafi. This de facto division of Libyan territory goes hand in hand with the one in Sudan and the Ivory Coast, which mark the first stages of the “Remodeling of Africa”.

Assets freeze

If the objective were to protect the civilian population, only the personal assets of the Gaddafi family plus those belonging to the regime’s dignitaries would have been frozen to prevent them from violating the arms embargo. But the freeze has also been enforced against the assets of the Libyan state. Now, it just so happens that Libya – a wealthy oil-producing country – possesses considerably large assets, part of which are invested in the Bank of the South, an institution dedicated to the funding of projects in the Third World.

As pointed out by Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, freezing the assets will not protect the civilians. The real aim here is to re-establish the monopoly of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund.

Coalition of the willing

If the objective were to protect the civilian population, the organisation in charge of implementing Resolution 1973 should have been the UN. Instead, the military operations were being coordinated by the US AfriCom and currently by NATO [5] It was precisely for that reason that Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu was incensed at the French initiative and requested an explanation from NATO.

Less diplomatically, Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin referred to Resolution 1973 as “is flawed and inadequate. If one reads it, then it immediately becomes clear that it authorises anyone to take any measures against a sovereign state. All in all, it reminds me of a medieval call to crusade,” he concluded. [6]

---

 

‘Mission creep’ feared in Libya campaign - The National | US maintains it will not send any ground troops into Libya.

 

Omar Karmi
The National
April 21, 2011

Nato military operations over Libya today enter their second month with forces loyal to Muammar Qaddafi still effective and pushing an offensive against opposition forces. As European countries start sending military advisers, the international effort is beginning to show signs of going beyond its original mission.

Trying to assuage concerns of mission creep, the US maintains it will not send any ground troops into Libya and that any US involvement on the ground will be for purely humanitarian reasons. But some US legislators are publicly worrying that the situation in Libya could develop into a stalemate unless greater military force is applied.

Analysts say that absent, the political objectives of the intervention are unlikely to be secured. UN Security Council Resolution 1973, which sanctioned the intervention, called on coalition members to use all available means short of a full-fledged invasion to protect Libyan civilians.

Read entire article

 

 

Lukashenko: Globalists Are Preparing To Strangle Belarus - Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko warned today that the globalists were preparing to strangle his country because of its refusal to join the new world order, with Belarus set to become the latest target of the contrived “Arab Spring” riots as the NATO powers further encircle Russia and China.

They want to force us to be just like everybody else….we will resist”

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Thursday, April 21, 2011

Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko warned today that the globalists were preparing to strangle his country because of its refusal to join the new world order, with Belarus set to become the latest target of the contrived “Arab Spring” riots as the NATO powers further encircle Russia and China.

“Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko said on Thursday Western countries are preparing direct interference in his country’s affairs and are trying “to strangle the country with a slipknot,” reports RIA Novosti.

“First there were political threats, disavowal of [presidential] elections, [European] entry bans and economic sanctions. Then there was an instigation of turmoil on our foreign currency market and dances on the bones after the blast at the Oktyabrskaya metro station,” Lukashenko said addressing the parliament and his people.”

Highlighting how the power elite designates any country that refuses to sacrifice its own sovereignty as a “rogue state,” Lukashenko spoke of how the elite, “Want to force us to be just like everybody else, like they are eventually. We are like a bone in their throat.”

“If they try to bend us, to bring us down to our knees, we will at least resist. We will fight for our plot of land,” the president added.

Just like Colonel Gaddafi and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Alexander Lukashenko is an autocrat who rules his country with an iron fist, but because he refuses to play ball with the globalists, Belarus has now become the next target of the manufactured global uprising, with US-trained militants waiting in the wings to overthrow Lukashenko and hand the country over to the NATO powers who are busy swallowing up nations as part of their long term agenda to isolate Russia and China.

Belarus is in the cross hairs because of its repeated refusal to join NATO, leading globalists at the recent Globsec 2011 conference to declare the country a threat to the EU and NATO. Of course, the tiny Russian satellite state poses no military threat whatsoever, but the notion that any sovereign country would have the gall to want to run its own affairs without being dictated to by global government is intolerable in the eyes of the new world order kingpins.

That’s why Lukashenko and Belarus were listed by the infamous Freedom House in an article entitled “Who’s Next?” that was published in the Council on Foreign Relation’s Foreign Policy magazine back in February.

While NATO and its allies kill protesters, women and children in Afghanistan, the western media has savaged Lukashenko for cracking down on demonstrations in Minsk.

Warmongering US Senator Joe Lieberman also publicly attacked Lukashenko during a speech last month, calling for the Belarusian President to release “activists” who are in fact US-trained militants attempting to overthrow Lukashenko, which might also provide us an indication of who was behind the metro bombing that killed 12 people last week.

As Tony Cartalucci explains in his excellent article, Besieging Belarus: Next on the Globalists’ Chopping Block, “Of course, these Belarusian activists have been trained, funded, and equipped by the West along side activists that have participated in the now admittedly US-funded “Arab Spring.” Foreign Policy magazine’s article “Revolution U,” reported that the US funded and supported CANVAS organization has trained activists from 50 different countries including Belarus. Shortly after CANVAS, then called Otpor, overthrew Serbia’s Slobodan Milosevic in 2000, they began clandestinely traveling to Belarus to meet with student activists. Ultimately their network was discovered and shut down. They would later infiltrate Georgian and Ukrainian politics and assist in the Rose and Orange color revolutions respectively.”

“In 2007, the US International Republican Institute (IRI) openly admitted to funding and supporting activists inside Belarus in an appeal to garner similar support from European Union members.”

The National Democratic Institution (NDI) also admits conducting “democracy assistance programs” in Belarus since 2000, which is merely globalist code for violent destabilization campaigns. Current NDI President Kenneth Wollack, a key Brookings Institute and Council on Foreign Relations member, also gave a speech earlier this year in which he demanded that Belarus be forced to join the “trans-Atlantic Community” (new world order), and called on the globalists to use the US-trained and funded opposition to fill the “political vacuum when openings occur.”

Belarus has blatantly been identified as one of the next dominoes to drop if the globalists can reinvigorate their staged “Arab Spring” which has temporarily ground to a halt in Libya after the failure of NATO-backed rebels to overthrow Gaddafi.

The evidence is now overwhelming that the wave of revolutions sweeping the globe which started in Tunisia earlier this year has been completely hijacked by globalist interests and is being used to mop up the few remaining “rogue states,” countries like Belarus, that have steadfastly refused to become vassal states for the global elite’s march towards world government. By getting out ahead of the turmoil and making it clear that Belarus is in the firing line, Lukashenko is desperately trying to avoid his country from being plundered by neo-colonialists who are in the throws of a massive geopolitical putsch to swallow up every single remaining country into the new world order borg collective.

---

Besieging Belarus: Next on the Globalists’ Chopping Block - With Libya preparing to face Western troops, and Syria fending off an overtly foreign-backed uprising, other nations long accused of being “rouge” by the global corporate-financier oligarchy are bracing for what is inevitably to come.

Tony Cartalucci
Prisonplanet.com
April 21, 2011

With Libya preparing to face Western troops, and Syria fending off an overtly foreign-backed uprising, other nations long accused of being “rogue” by the global corporate-financier oligarchy are bracing for what is inevitably to come. While earlier assurances were made to the House of Saud, it seems even they are making provisions to secure their kingdom against their own society unhinging, fueled by both years of draconian brutality and now US funded sedition.

The groundwork has been laid for this global upheaval to spread as far as Moscow and Beijing, however a little known republic is getting increasingly more attention from the corporate-financier oligarchy, the Eastern European nation of Belarus. With 9.5 million people and sitting right across the border from Moscow, it serves as the next logical step for NATO’s expansion toward the goal of encircling Russia.

After Tunisia fell and protests began brewing in Egypt, Foreign Policy magazine published Freedom House’s list of “Who’s Next?” On the list was Belarus’ Aleksandr Lukashenko. NATO has admitted the reluctance of Belarus to join its now unjustified yet ever expanding organization, and at the Globsec 2011 conference, Belarus was considered a threat to both the EU and NATO, having turned down NATO in favor of closer ties with Moscow. The corporate mainstream media for their part, has berated the Belarusian government for putting down protests launched after the results of recent elections that saw the Western-backed opposition defeated.

Warmonger Joe Lieberman sums up for all who have been paying attention, that the US-funded revolutionary wave is aimed at Belarus next. In a March 2011 speech, Joe Lieberman called for the unconditional release of Belarusian activists as well as the tightening of sanctions against Belarusian president Alexander Lukashenko.

Of course, these Belarusian activists have been trained, funded, and equipped by the West along side activists that have participated in the now admittedly US-funded “Arab Spring.” Foreign Policy magazine’s article “Revolution U,” reported that the US funded and supported CANVAS organization has trained activists from 50 different countries including Belarus. Shortly after CANVAS, then called Otpor, overthrew Serbia’s Slobodan Milosevic in 2000, they began clandestinely traveling to Belarus to meet with student activists. Ultimately their network was discovered and shut down. They would later infiltrate Georgian and Ukrainian politics and assist in the Rose and Orange color revolutions respectively.

In 2007, the US International Republican Institute (IRI) openly admitted to funding and supporting activists inside Belarus in an appeal to garner similar support from European Union members. In their appeal they state:

“IRI has been active in furthering democratic processes in Belarus since 2001. Along with our European partners, we work with a coalition of pro-democratic political parties, nongovernmental organizations and activists in Belarus whose goal is to bring true democratic change to a country that has been ruled by a dictator for more than a decade.”

More recently, IRI states on their website that, “Pro-democracy reformers require the support of the international community as they stand up to brutal regimes. In Belarus, Burma, Cuba, North Korea, Syria and Zimbabwe IRI is supporting activists and reformers in their efforts to find and open political space,” indicating a myriad of extraterritorial meddling around the world, including in Belarus.

IRI’s doppelganger organization, the National Democratic Institution (NDI) states on their website that, “NDI has conducted democracy assistance programs in Belarus since 2000, partnering with citizens who want to build democratic political institutions. The Institute has helped to strengthen nongovernmental organizations and political parties, and has helped citizens learn more about their rights and responsibilities.”

Brookings Institute and Council on Foreign Relations “task force” member, and current NDI president Kenneth Wollack gave testimony in January, 2011 regarding the December 2010 elections and the failure of the admittedly US funded and supported Belarusian opposition. In his testimony, Wollack explains in excruciating detail the networks and methods they intend to use to bolster the opposition and fill the “political vacuum when openings occur.” Everything from US funded poll monitors to sponsoring political activity conducted by opposition parties is explained. Most importantly perhaps is Wollack’s repeating of a desire to bring Belarus into the “trans-Atlantic Community,” similar to words parroted by Joe Lieberman in his more recent speech on the Senate floor.

Of course, both IRI and NDI are funded by the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), answering the question as to where the Belarusian opposition is getting their money to fund these sponsored events and to rebuild their networks after the December 2010 election. NED itself boasts an array of activities it funds in Belarus including building up NGOs and “civil society,” promoting independent media (propaganda), and even training Belarusian activists abroad as were the participants in the recent “Arab Spring.”

To get a good idea of what sort of “ideals” the Belarusian opposition embrace, the European Belarus Civil Campaign is a good place to start. Andrei Sannikov, a leading opposition candidate and the “international coordinator” of Charter’97, one of the leading opposition movements in Belarus, is working through the European Belarus Civil Campaign in order to integrate the nation into the globalist European Union.

It is also instructive to consider that the US State Department’s Movements.org, which has played an instrumental role in recruiting, training, and supporting activists throughout the “Arab Spring,” is also closely following and reporting favorably on the activities of the Belarusian opposition.

Joe Lieberman’s outrageous call to further meddle in Belarus’ sovereign affairs is but a collective indicator of years of meddling, plotting, funding, and supporting Western aligned opposition to undermine the government in Belarus. The desire to hammer Belarus into the NATO alliance and fully encircle Russia with states as belligerent toward Moscow as Georgia, has all but been openly declared. With the “Arab Spring” turning out to be open subversion and even open war to consolidate regional hegemony across Northern Africa and the Middle East, both Russia and China must brace as the wave of destabilization is purposefully directed toward them and their peripheries.

 

From Waco to Libya: 18 Years of Humanitarian Mass Murder - LewRockwell.com | “The Davidian cult in Waco was dealt with by armored vehicles,” remarked Gaddafi.

Anthony Gregory
LewRockwell.com
April 19, 2011

David Koresh, leader of Branch Dividians at Waco (left) and Muammar Gaddafi, Libyan dictator (right), both seemingly justified invasion under a “humanitarian” pretext (respectively).

“The Davidian cult in Waco was dealt with by armored vehicles,” remarked Muammar Gaddafi in February, defending his own crackdowns in light of the U.S. government’s. April 19 marks eighteen years since the end of the Waco siege and exactly one month since Obama began bombing Libya. Now that the federal government is again shedding blood in the name of humanitarianism, we might reflect on how it obtains legitimacy for its most brazen acts of violence.

Long ago, when governments slaughtered the enemy merely for being different and thus subhuman or for occupying desired territory, such crude rationales satisfied the states’ agents and subjects. The modern democratic state, however, employs more sophisticated propaganda when it burns, gasses, shoots, and bombs people including civilians. There is always the excuse of security: the targeted people pose a threat. When this argument seems tenuous, it is well complemented by that most insidious of pretenses: The killing is done for the good of others. It is an act of kindness. The American empire, like the Roman and British before it, inflicts violence to civilize and rescue those in need.

Along these lines even the unparalleled mass death of World War II has been vindicated. Since then most U.S. killing sprees have been directed against Hitler’s ghost. Saddam Hussein and Slobodan Milosevic were both compared to the Nazi ruler. So were David Koresh and Muammar Gaddafi.

Killing Children to Stop Child Abuse

In the case of Koresh, leader of the Branch Davidian church at Mount Carmel, Texas, the comparisons to Hitler were especially strained. Yet everything about the siege just outside Waco, aside from its humanitarian rationale, seems to have been forgotten. Sure, the religious group was “stockpiling weapons.” One of them was a legal arms dealer. But why didn’t the cops just arrest Koresh while he was hanging out around town? He was an integrated member of the community. Local law enforcement befriended him. The feds were given intimate access to the Davidians’ home – even enjoying a stint on their firing range with Koresh – and he welcomed them to inspect the property. The raid commenced on February 28, 1993, not out of anything approaching necessity, but because the ATF wanted to look good for the cameras. “Operation Showtime” was the name of the long-planned attack on the Davidian home. Its main purpose: to overcome the bad publicity the agency had suffered over allegations of sexual harrassment and racism.

The feds had constructed a model of the Davidian home where they rehearsed the raid, whose planning began late in the George H.W. Bush administration. But the raid went horribly wrong. The Davidians fought back – apparently in self-defense, which is why when the ATF ran out of bullets, the Davidians ceased fire, and let the agents leave their property in peace.

Soon enough the domestic siege looked militaristic even by modern American standards. It was full-out psychological warfare: The FBI took over and cut off the Davidians’ access to the press, to water, to phone calls with relatives or lawyers. They blasted recordings of loud, obnoxious music and the sounds of animals being slaughtered. They shone bright lights upon the home all night. They called it a hostage situation, but people trying to leave the building were typically met with flash-bang grenades thrown at them by the feds.

The siege ended on April 19, 1993, after the FBI spent hours pumping flammable and poisonous CS gas into the area where women and children had gone for safety. Then the Bureau rammed a tank and launched incendiary devices into the home. The Davidians also had Coleman lanterns in nearly every room, which could have easily fallen over in the chaos, and various combustible chemicals stored in the gymnasium. Although Clinton blamed the Davidians for starting the fire, the flames erupted in a manner consistent with the tank’s collision into the building. There is no credible evidence that the Davidians were planning a mass suicide by fire, and all the survivors have denied that they were. As researcher Carol Moore put it, “There is no doubt that Mount Carmel was systematically turned into a fire trap. The only question is, was it done through criminal negligence or with intention to commit mass murder?”

Some survivors convicted in the mockery of a trial have only been out of prison since 2007. Within government, however, no one even had his wrist slapped. Most Americans assume that the government was negligent at worst, and that even this can be forgiven, since the FBI, with military assistance, was attempting a rescue of the innocent. You see, as we’ve been reminded many times, David Koresh was molesting children.

The first argument behind this accusation concerns Koresh’s multiple young wives. Jack Harwell, the Sheriff of McLennan County, explained why we should not excuse the raid on this basis:

To this day, we don’t have a case that we can make against Vernon Howell [David Koresh] or anyone else for child abuse even though the news media here and other people were saying this is what happened. A man from Australia said this is what happened. But we can never get them to give us anything more that just “we know that’s what happened.” You have to have proof to go into court . . . Keep in mind, too, that most of the girls who were involved were at least 14 years old and 14-year-olds get married with parental consent. So if their parents were there and letting things happen in the way of sexual activities and what have you with their 14-year-old kids, you have common law husbands and wives. Uh, I don’t say that I agree with that and that I approve of it. But at the same time, if parents are there and they’re giving parental consent, we have a problem with that in making a case.

There are more serious allegations of abuse, but they too are questionable. On the first day of the 1995 Congressional hearings on Waco, Democrats attempting to whitewash the Clinton administration’s conduct brought out Kiri Jewell, who accused Koresh of having molested her when she was ten. No charges of this nature had been pressed against Koresh. However, during the standoff, Jewell, who was not living at Mount Carmel at the time, had appeared on The Phil Donahue Show while her dad pitched their story to the television networks. On the show, she said she expected to be one of Koresh’s wives at age 13. In another public statement, she said that while living with the Davidians she never expected to live past 12.

Despite all this, Jewell’s testimony forever colored the mainstream perception of the Branch Davidian Church as a cult of child molestation, which somehow is supposed to make the federal killing less objectionable. The public assumes these allegations are true and no due process is necessary to conclude that the FBI, a heroic if flawed institution, swept in to stop a monster from abusing minors. Presumably, had those children not been gassed, suffocated and burnt to death, they along with the surviving kids would have been exposed to Koresh’s torment. This narrative is hardly questioned now and it was hardly questioned then: Not only should we believe all of the government’s accusations about Koresh, but those charges somehow mitigate what happened in 1993 when more American civilians died at the hands of the federal government than in any confrontation since Wounded Knee.

Bombing Libyans to Save Libyans

Eighteen years after the flames of Waco, we again see the federal government killing in the name of human rights. Practically no one questions the utilitarian calculus of this altruistic butchery. Most critiques of the Libya war concern strategic prudence, legal issues, or the fiscal price tag.

Should we leave unchallenged the characterization of Obama and NATO as protectors of the innocent? In particular, we hear that Operation Odyssey Dawn prevented Gaddafi from massacring large numbers of civilians in Benghazi. Almost everyone takes it for granted.

To be sure, Gaddafi is a dictator and thug, who indeed killed hundreds of rebels before U.S. cruise missiles hit Tripoli. But would have he slaughtered tens or even hundreds of thousands, as was suggested and claimed, if not for Obama’s intervention? Stephen Walt shares his compelling doubts:

Although everyone recognizes that Qaddafi is a brutal ruler, his forces did not conduct deliberate, large-scale massacres in any of the cities he has recaptured, and his violent threats to wreak vengeance on Benghazi were directed at those who continued to resist his rule, not at innocent bystanders. There is no question that Qaddafi is a tyrant with few (if any) redemptive qualities, but the threat of a bloodbath that would “[stain] the conscience of the world” (as Obama put it) was slight.

Other scholars have questioned Obama’s propaganda. University of Texas associate professor Alan Kuperman notes that Gaddafi “did not massacre civilians in any of the other big cities he captured – Zawiya, Misrata, Ajdabiya – which together have a population equal to Benghazi.” Human Rights Watch has recently released casualty figures on Misrata that bolster his point. Kuperman writes:

Misurata’s population is roughly 400,000. In nearly two months of war, only 257 people – including combatants – have died there. Of the 949 wounded, only 22 – less than 3 percent – are women. If Khadafy were indiscriminately targeting civilians, women would comprise about half the casualties. . .

Nor did Khadafy ever threaten civilian massacre in Benghazi, as Obama alleged. The “no mercy” warning, of March 17, targeted rebels only, as reported by The New York Times, which noted that Libya’s leader promised amnesty for those “who throw their weapons away.” Khadafy even offered the rebels an escape route and open border to Egypt, to avoid a fight “to the bitter end.”

Paul Miller, who served on Bush and Obama’s National Security Councils, intones that far from a genocidal clash, we are looking at a “Libyan civil war. . . between a tyrant and his cronies on one side, and a collection of tribes, movements, and ideologists (including Islamists) on the other.” (Incidentally, these opponents of Gadhafi’s regime, like practically all other insurgent allies of the CIA, are far from the angelic freedom fighters that the U.S. implies. Their leader outright admits connections between his group and al-Qaeda, which has offered his rebels aid. The U.S. went to war with Iraq boasting of Saddam’s fictitious ties to al-Qaeda, a connection that was “proven” on the tortured testimony of Libyan al-Qaeda operative Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi. But unlike Saddam, America’s allies in the struggle against Gaddafi are probably tied to these Islamist killers.)

In any event, let us concede for argument’s sake that Gaddafi is precisely as diabolical as is claimed, and the dictator indeed wishes to wipe out as many innocents as possible just for the sake of it. Or let’s assume this was a reasonable inference when the NATO bombing began. Time and again we have been reminded that Benghazi is home to over half a million people. But does a large population mean they’d all be vulnerable? Let us recall that Gaddafi is not Harry Truman. He has no nukes. As Seumas Milne put it: “Given that [Gaddafi’s] ramshackle forces were unable to fully retake towns like Misurata or even Ajdabiya when the rebels were on the back foot, the idea that they would have been able to overrun an armed and hostile city of 700,000 people any time soon seems far-fetched.” Whereas the citizens of Benghazi have arms, like the civilians at Waco, they far outnumber Gaddafi’s forces, unlike the Branch Davidians against the FBI. Even if he wished to commit a Waco-like massacre of a whole city, Gaddafi had more effective limits on his killing than does the U.S. government.

The notion that U.S. bombs stopped Gaddafi’s murder of many thousands is more than dubious, and it was at the time the bombings began. Even if we believed the questionable claims about his intention to commit such an act, it is not clear how he was supposed to have succeeded. Yet simply by starting a war and saying it was to protect the innocent, Obama shifted public support of intervention against Libya from about 25% to about 60%.

Putting aside the suspicious claims of Gaddafi’s impending civilian massacre, we might wonder how many civilians Obama and company have actually killed in Libya. The NATO governments shrug off any reports of such casualties or deny them outright. Like its predecessor the Obama administration doesn’t do body counts. What’s more, the U.S. intervention most likely “magnifies the threat to civilians in Libya, and beyond,” Kuperman argues, citing the Balkans in the 1990s and showing that foreign bombs often exacerbate ethnic cleansing and civilian massacres.

Indeed, U.S. involvement appears to have prolonged the bloodshed in Libya. Although Obama denied the goal was regime change, he now says Gaddafi must step down to end the war. Gaddafi has offered a ceasefire to the rebels, who rejected it, probably knowing that the U.S. will support them so long as they resist until the regime is toppled.

People can freely argue that U.S. intervention has preempted Gaddafi’s impending genocide, but the burden should be on them to prove it, and as with Kosovo, they have not done so. To the contrary, Gaddafi has seemingly focused his violence on the rebels, whereas the U.S. central state is not always so discriminating. At Waco, dozens of children were snuffed out. In Iraq and Afghanistan, hundreds of thousands of innocents have died in wars based on lies. In Obama’s drone attacks in Pakistan, ten civilians die for every “militant” killed, even according to moderate estimates by very mainstream sources. That these “militants” are a threat to the United States government is never demonstrated, but let’s assume they are. The ratio of unarmed, innocent bystanders to belligerents killed by the United States is higher than that of which Gaddafi is guilty in Misurata.

Why do people believe the U.S. government’s propaganda about Libya when every single major military intervention it has conducted has exacerbated the problems on the ground or at least added to the death toll directly? Why is the mere assertion that a massacre is being averted a license for the U.S. to drop at least hundreds of bombs?

18 Years of Murderous Salvation

The American belief in benevolent mass murder is not a partisan disposition. Most liberals and conservatives alike take it for granted that, while the federal government’s armed agents sometimes act recklessly or carry out mistaken orders, their acts should never be seen as murder. The assumption is nearly universal that Obama, Bush and Clinton, whatever their partisan opponents might think, are not mass murderers in the mold of Gaddafi, or cult leaders along the lines of Koresh, when in fact our presidents are far worse than either of these men in terms of cultish power as well as sheer body count. All three of these chief executives, and many before them, have commanded the loyalty of far more subordinates willing to die on their orders than Koresh ever could, and have extinguished more innocent lives than Gaddafi ever did.

Waco and Libya are only the first and latest examples of U.S. humanitarian atrocities in the post-Cold War era. In both situations, we see the U.S. government leaving behind rubble and death, and the chattering classes agreeing that Washington has the innocents’ best interests at heart, even as it imposes sanctions on civilians or cuts them off from water, disregarding the very humanity of the victims of Uncle Sam’s explosions. When D.C. kills it is never seen as when others, whether private American citizens or foreign despots, do it.

When a private religious separatist allegedly molests children, it is an excuse for gassing children to death. But when the federal government molests children it is merely airport security. When a foreign dictator is allegedly about to kill tens of thousands of innocents, it is an excuse for another non-defensive U.S. presidential war. But when the U.S. government kills millions though sanctions, chemical warfare, conventional bombings and depleted uranium, it is simply the mainstream foreign policy consensus at work.

It is particularly hard to cut through these double standards when left-liberal presidents kill, as both sides of the spectrum benefit from pretending that these politicians are less trigger-happy than the conservatives. Yet Clinton and Obama have both revealed themselves to be as bloodthirsty as the Bushes before them.

Whether using the military to police the world or militarizing the police here at home, the federal government’s favorite activity appears to be killing. Thanks to the domestic precedent of Waco and the foreign-policy traditions of the last few presidents, there are now essentially no limits on the power of Washington to kill men, women and children, at home and abroad, and get away with it in the court of public opinion. Nothing gives the executive branch the free hand to snuff out human life like the promise of humanitarian salvation.

---

Warning of a ‘new Vietnam’ in Libya as British military advisers go in - David Cameron was accused last night of risking a Vietnam-style quagmire in Libya by sending military advisers to help the country’s Al Queda rebels.

TIM SHIPMAN and IAN DRURY
UK Daily Mail
April 20, 2011

David Cameron was accused last night of risking a Vietnam-style quagmire in Libya by sending military advisers to help the country’s rebels.

The first official deployment of troops on the ground marks a significant escalation in the war and immediately invited charges of ‘mission creep’.

A ten-strong team of intelligence, signals and logistics experts will help set up an opposition headquarters to take on Colonel Gaddafi’s forces.

The Prime Minister approved the move amid frustration that Nato’s no-fly zone has failed to shield civilians properly.

But Libyan deputy foreign minister Khalid Kaim branded the move an ‘act of war’ and senior MPs and former commanders warned of echoes of America’s first steps in Vietnam.

They said Britain risked getting bogged down in Libya for years and one demanded a recall of Parliament.

Full article here

---

Libya Proxy Cold War Between China & West? - Many share the opinion that Washington is pursuing a larger goal than just regime change across the Arab world. RT crosses live to Brazil to speak to Asia Times correspondent – Pepe Escobar – about the role some countries are playing in the uprisings.

Russia Today
Wednesday, April 20, 2011

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Gf3VYR2YO4&feature=player_embedded

---

Libya: France and Italy to send officers to aid Al Qaeda rebels - France and Italy have said they are to send small teams of military officers to advise Libyan rebels who are seeking to topple Col Muammar Gaddafi.

BBC News
Wednesday, April 20, 2011
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J51AeG5zdSM&feature=player_embedded

France and Italy have said they are to send small teams of military officers to advise Libyan rebels who are seeking to topple Col Muammar Gaddafi.

French officials said fewer than 10 would be sent, while Italy’s defence minister announced that 10 would go.

The UK said on Tuesday it was sending a similar team to the city of Benghazi.

Meanwhile, the UN has said the reported use of cluster munitions by Col Gaddafi’s forces in the city of Misrata “could amount to international crimes”.

Full story here.

---

 

Britain sending military team to Libya - CNN | Britain said Tuesday it is expanding its presence in Libya.

CNN
April 19, 2011

Britain said Tuesday it is expanding its presence in Libya with military advisers while the European Union said it is prepared to send troops for humanitarian assistance if requested by the United Nations.

Plans for increased Western involvement surfaced as Moammar Gadhafi’s forces shelled Misrata again Tuesday. Residents and refugees rescued from the city described a terrifying situation in the ravaged western city that continues daily to pay a heavy price in the Libyan war.

“The situation is very dangerous, every day the shelling is increasing,” said a resident who was not identified for safety reasons. “They are using more types of weapons, and people are wondering why NATO is not doing anything.”

Read entire article

---

 

Libyan Al Qaeda Rebels Fighting the Globalists’ War

As the global corporate-financier oligarchs prepare the way rhetorically and logistically to send in the ground troops we were told would never set foot on Libyan soil, in a war that was only to last days, then weeks, but now over a month, the discernment, ambition, and true intentions of the Libyan rebels must be called into question.

How the Devil Pays

Tony Cartalucci
Prison Planet.com
Wednesday, April 20, 2011

Bangkok, Thailand April 20, 2011 – As the global corporate-financier oligarchs prepare the way rhetorically and logistically to send in the ground troops we were told would never set foot on Libyan soil, in a war that was only to last days, then weeks, but now over a month, the discernment, ambition, and true intentions of the Libyan rebels must be called into question.

After rebel leader Abdel-Hakim al-Hasidi admitted to being trained in Afghanistan and subsequently fighting American troops there, and admitting many of the rebel fighters now joining him in Libya had similarly returned from Afghanistan as well as Iraq, it must strike them as tremendous irony that the same Americans they were filling pine boxes with overseas, are now protecting their lives and handing them an entire country to rule over.

Of course in life, nothing is quite that simple. The rebels seem to forget that just months ago Libyan leader Muammar Qaddafi was also the recipient of similarly ironic support from the West. In the end, it appears it was merely a ploy to disarm and infiltrate Qaddafi’s regime ahead of a US funded, armed, and supported militant uprising. The betrayal does not end there, with the militant rebels in tanks and fighter jets, brandishing newly procured weaponry flowing over the Egyptian border with Washington’s full knowledge and in direct violation of UNSC r.1973, the corporate owned media has continuously branded these militants as Libyan “civilians” and Qaddafi’s attempts to restore order in his country as an inhumane “massacre.”

The intent is to fully justify any means necessary to remove Qaddafi from power, and so the rebels think, hand the country and its riches over to the green shoots of democracy led by the valiant Al Qaeda-linked militants that toppled a tyrant. What woeful ignorance.

While the dichotomy of Western politics is merely for public consumption, what each camp states publicly can be put together as a composite giving us a clearer picture of the overall globalist agenda. Neo-Conservative war monger Daniel Pipes, a PNAC signatory, CFR member, and co-conspirator in many of the darkest chapters of recent American history, was recently sharing his “doubts” over the final result of the “Arab Spring.” He believes that ultimately extremists will prevail in many cases and only complicate US relations with certain countries.

Of course, Pipes most likely didn’t miss the memo and is fully aware that the “Arab Spring” is a US funded gambit, one his fellow “Neo-Cons” lining the National Endowment for Democracy and the fraudulent Freedom House are admittedly involved in. At the very least, he must have picked up the New York Times and read as much. So what exactly is Pipes trying to tell us? He is saying that as soon as the Libyan rebels secure Libya, or the Muslim Brotherhood takes hold of Syria, or Yemen, or wins out in a co-opted counterrevolution against International Crisis Group stooge Mohamed ElBaradei in Egypt, the blinders Western propagandists seems to be wearing will suddenly drop and point out that indeed the globalists have installed extremists “by accident.”

To rectify this, Libyan rebels will be betrayed just as quickly as Qaddafi was. They will be removed from power, and replaced by Western stooges protected by NATO ground troops, conveniently already being put on the ground in Libya, and will stay there permanently. The globalist “Neo-Con” think tank Foreign Policy Initiative has stated, “The best way to reduce the potential dangers posed by extremist infiltration is for the United States and its allies to remain engaged in Libya.”

This engagement most likely will take the shape of the other unending “engagements” in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the years of cross-border raids into Pakistan. The oil money that once built water ways, public housing, and farms from Benghazi to Tripoli, will be funneled directly out of the country and into the corporate-financier’s accounts. The corporate-financier oligarchs will have taken yet another nation-state down with the help of its own gullible population, and for their gullibility, they will pay for the rest of their lives, as will their children and their children’s children.

To understand the full scope of the global corporate-financier oligarchy’s designs toward any given nation, we must simply look back at the brazen admissions made over the intended future stemming from the outright military conquest of Iraq and Paul Bremer’s (CFR) planned economic reformation of the broken nation. The Economist enumerates the “economic liberalization” of Iraq in a piece titled “Let’s all go to the yard sale: If it all works out, Iraq will be a capitalist’s dream:”

1. 100% ownership of Iraqi assets.
2. Full repatriation of profits.
3. Equal legal standing with local firms.
4. Foreign banks allowed to operate or buy into local banks.
5. Income and corporate taxes capped at 15%.
6. Universal tariffs slashed to 5%.

Anyone who would willfully make a deal with such people must have their discernment called into question. As Hugo Chavez of Venezuela said of Hosni Mubarak’s decades of appeasing the globalists and his eventual ousting from power at the hands of US funded, trained, and supported protesters, “that’s how the devil pays.” Indeed it is, and it is an instructive lesson for others including the rebels of Benghazi to consider as they attempt to make their own deals with the globalists today.

UN-believable: Who sanctioned Gaddafi out? - Russia’s Foreign Minister has joined the criticism of NATO’s strategy in Libya. The alliance wants Colonel Gaddafi out, and is supporting the rebels with aid and air strikes. But Sergei Lavrov says toppling Gaddafi is not sanctioned by the United Nations.

RT
April 19, 2011

Russia’s Foreign Minister has joined the criticism of NATO’s strategy in Libya. The alliance wants Colonel Gaddafi out, and is supporting the rebels with aid and air strikes. But Sergei Lavrov says toppling Gaddafi is not sanctioned by the United Nations.

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

---

Pretext For War On Libya Proven Fraudulent By Casualty Figures - Paul Joseph Watson | Data clearly shows Gaddafi has not deliberately targeted innocent civilians.As the EU prepares to invade Libya with ground troops under the contrived pretext of “humanitarian aid,” Texas University Professor Alan J. Kuperman highlights the fact that the entire justification behind the NATO-backed aggression has been proven fraudulent by casualty figures that clearly indicate Gaddafi has not deliberately targeted civilians.

Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
April 19, 2011

As the EU prepares to invade Libya with ground troops under the contrived pretext of “humanitarian aid,” Texas University Professor Alan J. Kuperman highlights the fact that the entire justification behind the NATO-backed aggression has been proven fraudulent by casualty figures that clearly indicate Gaddafi has not deliberately targeted civilians.

Appearing on Russia Today, Kuperman dismissed the Obama administration’s claim that there would be a “bloodbath” in Libya if there was no foreign intervention, pointing out that there is no evidence Gaddafi is deliberately targeting civilians and engaging in massacres.

The EU is now awaiting the green light from the United Nations as it prepares to do what the initial UN resolution specifically forbade – sending in ground troops in the name of “humanitarian aid”. The EU has made it clear that its troops will attack Gaddafi forces if they are impeded in any way from taking over regions in the east of the country, and securing “sea and land corridors”.

Of course, the ground invasion was already unfolding before the so-called “no fly zone” was even enforced, with hundreds of British, American and French special forces troops arriving in the country at the end of February to train rebels. The humanitarian hoax was then manufactured as a veil with which to camouflage NATO’s wanton act of aggression, with the corporate media dutifully regurgitating baseless claims about Gaddafi slaughtering his own people while concocting lies about his regime using western journalists as human shields.

In addition, lurid claims about Gaddafi forces bombing “protesters” from fighter jets on February 22 over Benghazi and Tripoli were completely dismissed by Russian military experts, who said that sophisticated satellite imagery from space showed no record of such actions.

Asked about claims of Gaddafi violence against innocents, Professor Kuperman responded, “There is no evidence of that in the cities that Gaddafi has captured either totally or partially,” citing Human Rights Watch figures that clearly illustrate how Gaddafi forces are targeting combatants and not innocent people.

In an op-ed for the Boston Globe, Kuperman accuses Barack Obama of “grossly exaggerated the humanitarian threat to justify military action in Libya,” highlighting the fact that the evidence clearly indicates Gaddafi is “Not deliberately massacring civilians but rather narrowly targeting the armed rebels who fight against his government.”

“Misurata’s population is roughly 400,000. In nearly two months of war, only 257 people — including combatants — have died there. Of the 949 wounded, only 22 — less than 3 percent — are women. If Khadafy were indiscriminately targeting civilians, women would comprise about half the casualties,” writes Kuperman, adding that the only thing to deepen the humanitarian suffering of innocents was the NATO-led attack, which will indefinitely prolong the civil war.

Of course, to the western media, rebels driving tanks, flying fighter jets and carrying RPG launchers are still classed as “protesters” or “civilians” in the Orwellian doublespeak world of humanitarian hypocrisy.

While the corporate media has played up Gaddafi’s supposed attacks on innocent people, evidence of which is thin on the ground, videos, images and testimony of rebel fighters engaging in massacres and beatings of innocents, including children, has been universally ignored.

While it’s obvious that there have been acts of brutal retaliation carried out by both sides that have killed innocent people, to claim that Gaddafi is overseeing a deliberate policy to attack innocents even as he battles against the might of NATO and the western-backed rebel forces is brazenly deceptive. Even the New York Times had to admit that the rebels were “making vastly inflated claims of his (Gaddafi’s) barbaric behavior,” and had “no loyalty to the truth in shaping their propaganda,” after the much promised “bloodbath” in Benghazi never materialized.

The humanitarian hoax behind the assault on Africa’s richest oil country was invented out of whole cloth to prevent what globalist forces feared most, the defeat of their own Al-Qaeda backed rebel forces.

“The actual prospect in Benghazi was the final defeat of the rebels,” writes Kuperman. “To avoid this fate, they desperately concocted an impending genocide to rally international support for “humanitarian’’ intervention that would save their rebellion.”

---

Alex Jones On EU Ground Invasion Of Libya - Alex Jones addresses the cynical, pre-planned announcement by the EU to officially launch ground forces in Libya, a policy set in place since late February / early March when U.S. and British originally deployed special forces.

Related: EU Prepares To Invade Libya With Ground Troops Under “Humanitarian” Hoax

Infowars.com
April 19, 2011

Alex Jones addresses the cynical, pre-planned announcement by the EU to officially launch ground forces in Libya, a policy set in place since late February / early March when U.S. and British originally deployed special forces. Despite the marching drums of escalating war, the Western powers are still trumpeting that operations in Libya are limited to humanitarian action.

Obama & co. started the bombings in Libya with a U.N. resolution and a supposed “no fly zone.” It was supposed to be a humanitarian crisis and not a war, then a “kinetic” military action and not a war. The West said from day one that there would never be ground forces used; but now that it’s official policy, Orwellian terms are used to mask its reality. This latest deception is all part of the imperial world government’s new favorite tool of revolution- one that amounts to first backing rebels, then following with a UN or NATO backed ground force and plenty of propaganda.

This invasions and acts of war & aggression will not stop until we speak out against it. The New World Order is intent on swallowing up rogue nations with independent central banks; it is intent on rolling back sovereignty and reigning-in even first world nations with debt and economic ruin. For the U.S, this is only worsened by an overstretched military now engaged in three ground “wars” and a free falling dollar.

---

 

LIBYAN REBEL WAR CRIMES: The Videos America Doesn’t Want You To See - Even as Qaddafi commits atrocities, the rebels are engaged in some of the same violence. And Washington has been forced to look the other way.

Gus Lubin
Business Insider
April 19, 2011

Yesterday we published footage from a town destroyed by Qaddafi’s rockets: Libyan Rebels Risk Death To Bring You This Video.

But even as Qaddafi commits atrocities, the rebels are engaged in some of the same violence. And Washington has been forced to look the other way.

We received the following email complaining of biased coverage. The reader links to a dozen videos showing atrocities committed by the rebels.

WARNING, THE VIDEOS ARE EXTREMELY GRAPHIC.

---

Dear Sir,

 

I am surprised with your title… It seems to me there was no risk because everyday the Libyan Rebels post at the you-tube videos taken from their mobile on what they do to soldiers, civilians who do not follow their beliefs…

These videos you do not show them to your public you are desperately to show only the good side but unfortunately for people who do not believe the west media they search the internet and they find quite a lot of videos that your so called rebels risk their lives evryday to bring videos of how Qaddafi has massacred his people… here are some links that u can see for your self.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YSR689ICYWw&feature=player_embedded

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_t5eMpvMly8&feature=player_embedded

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hloG7RIUY-Y&feature=uploademail

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UlhagKw0MWU&feature=related the boy that the rebels beat up because he supported the gov…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VwUfgGDiaSM&feature=uploademail

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v21AfK1SPHs&feature=uploademail

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VoL4IHNQUuk&feature=uploademail here is an old man beaten by the rebels

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYLs-OOsxNg&feature=player_embedded here some girls from Benghazi who are not with the rebels where raped by the Rebels the peaceful with risk to bring the videos to the public… she is calling for the Libyan army to come to save them!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vh8pMv–Hs0&feature=uploademail they are doing it just like the americans.. humiliating sexually – that is a direct evidence of the rebel-CIA connection

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VkcMgPsB3Gs&feature=player_embedded&oref=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.informationclearinghouse.info%2Farticle27910.htm&has_verified=1 Libyan rebels behead,mutilate a soldier that surrenderd… where is the cnn?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zWN0ffheWy0&feature=player_embedded

I have learned now that when people die in Libya under the NATO bombing, killing civilians and little children. The Government of Qatar, dancing and having fun celebrating their participation in this crime and enjoys revenues from oil that they will receiveIn this video you will see the victims of the bombing and dancing members of the Government of Qatar Spread it on net and media THATS WHATS WRITTEN FOR THE ABOVE LINK..

http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2011/04/14/false_pretense_for_war_in_libya/?camp=misc%3Aon%3Ashare%3Aarticle THIS IS FROM BOSTON

I have loads of videos like the above which i can fill a whole page are these rebels realy risking their LIVES?? or are u trying to persuade the people that its right that America intervined with NATO? just because America, England and France need to do wars so that your nation does not realize that your country is bankrupt… what kind of journalists are you??? Hiding the truth.. how can you live with your selves in making another nation misrable with orphans, are you that thirsty of blood that you have not realized that you have become vampires on weaker nations! Working for the New World Order does not mean that tomorrow you will still have your job… wake up and do your job proparly.. be first true to yourself and then to your readers!!!

Most of you journalists are ashame to your proffesion… I wonder how you sleep at night??? Because today its Libya very soon it will be America, England, France… have you realized that we are at the brick of the III World War… and you are playing their game.

Nobody said that Qaddafi is an angel but neither your president or the Kings in the arab world…

so the next time you LIE to your readers think first what you are doing.. America is financing Al Qaeda and the Brotherhood of Islam who are the rebels and then you will start saying to the American nation we apologize but these people now are terrorist so we have to go againg to war… are you kidding me???

you can answer me if you wish but also you can visit me on the face book https://www.facebook.com/pages/STOP-THE-WAR-IN-LIBYA-WE-DEMAND-IT/213018878711849#!/pages/STOP-THE-WAR-IN-LIBYA-WE-DEMAND-IT/213018878711849 there you will see the original news not what you do pumpering the rebels and saying that they risked their lives to bring the video… the rebels have massacred a lot of civilians who do not want to follow them….

Personaly I do not care about Qaddafi but what you are doing is WRONG…. YOU ARE NOT SAYING THE TRUTH….. YOU ARE LYING TO YOUR READERS

---

A War for Oil? Why, Yes, It Was - Back in the heady, heated days before the invasion of Iraq, one of the quickest ways to be relegated to the margins of the debate was to claim that the financial interests of politically connected oil companies played any role in the considerations of the great statesmen of the West as they confronted the global menace of Saddam Hussein.

CHRIS FLOYD
Empire Burlesque
April 19, 2011

Back in the heady, heated days before the invasion of Iraq, one of the quickest ways to be relegated to the margins of the debate was to claim that the financial interests of politically connected oil companies played any role in the considerations of the great statesmen of the West as they confronted the global menace of Saddam Hussein.

Anyone who suggested such a thing was immediately declared “unserious,” a “knee-jerk radical,” even — gasp! — “a conspiracy theorist.” Later protests with their “No Blood for Oil” slogans were similarly dismissed. “Serious” policy analysts followed the lead of one of the prime movers of Western policy, the Rt. Hon. Tony Blair, who declared, weeks before the invasion, that “the oil conspiracy theory is honestly one of the most absurd when you analyse it.”

But this week, the Independent unearthed a remarkable cache of “smoking gun” documents that confirm, yet again, the collusion of political leaders and oil barons to divvy up Iraq’s oil — months before the invasion was launched. The documents — minutes of meetings between British ministers and senior oil executives — paint a bald, brazen picture of politicos and plutocrats jockeying to ensure that the oil barons get what one of Blair’s own ministers called — in the Capone-like patois that our great and good use when they think no one is listening — “a fair slice of the action” when the invaders seize control of Iraq’s oil.

Needless to say, these documents were withheld from the much-ballyhooed Chilcot Inquiry into the origins of the war. That toothless investigation served chiefly as a stage for bloodstained wretches — like Blair himself — to regurgitate their old self-justifying deceits; the oil angle received scant mention. Likewise, the oil companies themselves have always denied, vociferously, that they had ever talked with government ministers about grabbing Iraqi oil.

It would superfluous to point out that they were all lying. As the Independent reports:

The minutes of a series of meetings between ministers and senior oil executives are at odds with the public denials of self-interest from oil companies and Western governments at the time …

Five months before the March 2003 invasion, Baroness Symons, then the Trade Minister, told BP that the Government believed British energy firms should be given a share of Iraq’s enormous oil and gas reserves as a reward for Tony Blair’s military commitment to US plans for regime change.

The papers show that Lady Symons agreed to lobby the Bush administration on BP’s behalf because the oil giant feared it was being “locked out” of deals that Washington was quietly striking with US, French and Russian governments and their energy firms.

Minutes of a meeting with BP, Shell and BG (formerly British Gas) on 31 October 2002 read: “Baroness Symons agreed that it would be difficult to justify British companies losing out in Iraq in that way if the UK had itself been a conspicuous supporter of the US government throughout the crisis.”

…The Foreign Office invited BP in on 6 November 2002 to talk about opportunities in Iraq “post regime change”. Its minutes state: “Iraq is the big oil prospect. BP is desperate to get in there and anxious that political deals should not deny them the opportunity.”

After another meeting, this one in October 2002, the Foreign Office’s Middle East director at the time, Edward Chaplin, noted: “Shell and BP could not afford not to have a stake in [Iraq] for the sake of their long-term future… We were determined to get a fair slice of the action for UK companies in a post-Saddam Iraq.”

Whereas BP was insisting in public that it had “no strategic interest” in Iraq, in private it told the Foreign Office that Iraq was “more important than anything we’ve seen for a long time”. … BP told the Government it was willing to take “big risks” to get a share of the Iraqi reserves, the second largest in the world.

Was the game worth the candle? Or rather, were the needless deaths of a million people slaughtered in the war and the bloody strife it spawned worth it? Well, for the oil companies, it certainly has been:

The 20-year contracts signed in the wake of the invasion were the largest in the history of the oil industry. They covered half of Iraq’s reserves – 60 billion barrels of oil, bought up by companies such as BP and CNPC (China National Petroleum Company), whose joint consortium alone stands to make £403m ($658m) profit per year from the Rumaila field in southern Iraq.

Last week, Iraq raised its oil output to the highest level for almost decade, 2.7 million barrels a day – seen as especially important at the moment given the regional volatility and loss of Libyan output. Many opponents of the war suspected that one of Washington’s main ambitions in invading Iraq was to secure a cheap and plentiful source of oil.

Come on: $658 million in pure gravy, year after year? What oil company wouldn’t kill a million innocent people for that kind of juice? You owe it to your shareholders! And a great big reservoir of oil on tap to draw on while you are off upsetting apple carts (and oil rigs) in other parts of the region? What self-respecting Great Gamester could pass that up?

Of course, the invasion and rape of Iraq was not only about oil. It was also about war profiteering. And “projecting dominance” over world affairs. And the deliberate militarization of American society to facilitate authoritarian rule at home and endless war abroad. And the psychosexual anxieties of witless, pampered elites who crave a specious identification with “National Greatness” (expressed through vast arrays of military hardware employed to murderous effect against largely defenseless human beings) in order to fill the holes in their withered little souls.

But oil was always a prime factor in this poisonous mix. And you can bet your bottom dollar that the same kind of “conversations” revealed in the Independent are going on right now, hugger-mugger, between politically connected oil companies and the great statesmen of the West as they seek “a fair slice of the action” in Libya’s oil fields.

 

---

 

UK Sends In Troops As Ground Invasion Of Libya Accelerates - Unleashing yet another deft salvo of Orwellian doublespeak, the British government announced today that it would be sending in military forces to “help” Libyan rebels while still insisting that it is not sending in military forces, as the EU gears up to dispatch a further 1,000 troops, also under the dubious pretense of preventing humanitarian suffering.

Pretext for deeper intervention required as globalist Al-Qaeda-backed rebels being soundly trounced by Gaddafi forces

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Tuesday, April 19, 2011

Unleashing yet another deft salvo of Orwellian doublespeak, the British government announced today that it would be sending in military forces to “help” Libyan rebels while still insisting that it is not sending in military forces, as the EU gears up to dispatch a further 1,000 troops, also under the dubious pretense of preventing humanitarian suffering.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a8_69OBPVDw&feature=player_embedded

Now that the globalists’ Al-Qaeda backed rebel forces are getting soundly trounced by Gaddafi’s army, western powers have embarked on a propaganda crusade to create a pretext for a ground invasion, despite the fact that it directly violates their own UN resolution. By sending in scout parties of troops, the globalists are desperately trying to goad Gaddafi into attacking so-called “peacekeepers” so that a case for wider intervention can be concocted.

Following the EU’s announcement that it is seeking UN authorization to dispatch 1,000 troops into the country whose job it will be to “secure sea and land corridors inside the country,” the British government announced today that special military officers will be sent into Benghazi to “help the fight against Colonel Muammar Gaddafi.”

“The extra personnel will add to a UK diplomatic team that is already liasing with rebel leaders in the eastern city,” reports Sky News.

Conservative MP John Baron said that the latest decision “tantamounts to regime change,” and slammed Foreign Secretary William Hague for not holding a second debate in Parliament.

Of course, the fact that British Special Forces, along with American and French troops, were already on the ground in February in Libya training rebel forces before the “no fly zone” was even voted on last month has been completely overlooked.

Despite dubious claims that the role of British military assets will be to teach rebels “how not to get killed,” as we have documented, the entire “humanitarian” ruse that has been used to sell the aggressive act of war is a complete fabrication. The EU has made it clear that if their forces are impeded in any way from taking over entire regions of the country, they will attack Gaddafi’s troops.

Figures provided by Human Rights Watch prove that Gaddafi has not embarked on a deliberate policy to massacre innocent people. After two months of warfare, just 257 people in Misurata, a city with a population of 400,000, have been killed. Of the 949 wounded, just 22 are women, less than 3 per cent.

As University of Texas Professor Alan J. Kuperman writes in the Boston Globe, “If Khadafy were indiscriminately targeting civilians, women would comprise about half the casualties.”

In addition, a mission by the British Civilians For Peace in Libya organization found “no evidence” that Colonel Gaddafi’s forces had attacked, bombed or killed any civilians in western Libya, after the group spent a week touring Tripoli and other areas in the country.

“In their interim findings, the campaign group claimed they had been able to “corroborate civilian casualties and fatalities due to Nato bombing” but “could find no evidence that three areas of Tripoli cited in UN resolution 1973 had been subjected to government forces bombardment,” reports Sky News.

Globalist forces are now fully committed to a ground invasion and destabilization campaign in Africa’s richest oil country, and they will not stop at manufacturing any pretext to oversee regime change in Libya. A staged attack on western interests either domestically or abroad will be blamed on Gaddafi, or a new humanitarian hoax in a similar vein to Kuwaiti incubator babies or Serbian death camps will be invented as a means of securing a second UN resolution to completely ransack the country and overthrow Gaddafi.

France’s 3 Wars: Are ‘victories’ worth the victims?

A leading NATO member is calling for ground troops in Libya, even though it’s against the UN resolution. France’s foreign affairs chairman is warning the campaign will be cornered without ‘boots on the ground’. The French public though are unconvinced, leaving President Sarkozy fighting a new front back home, as Daniel Bushell reports..

RT
April 19, 2011

A leading NATO member is calling for ground troops in Libya, even though it’s against the UN resolution. France’s foreign affairs chairman is warning the campaign will be cornered without ‘boots on the ground’. The French public though are unconvinced, leaving President Sarkozy fighting a new front back home, as Daniel Bushell reports.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YhbE9C9Kcow&feature=player_embedded

Cables Reveal State Department, CIA NGOs Fomented Syrian Unrest - Kurt Nimmo | Syria regime marked for removal following the September 11 false flag attacks. The State Department has secretly financed Syrian political opposition groups and related projects, including a satellite TV channel that beams anti-government programming into the country, according to previously undisclosed diplomatic cables.

April 18, 2011

Following the false flag attack on September 11, 2001, the Bush administration announced it planned to go after the so-called “axis of evil,” specifically Iran, Iraq and North Korea. Following Bush’s January 2002 speech, United Nations ambassador John Bolton quietly added three countries to the list – Syria, Libya and Cuba.


CIA, State Department organized demonstrations grow in Syria.

For a time, Libya was removed from the hit list after Muammar Gaddafi agreed to abandon his WMD program. Gaddafi’s announcement was treated with much fanfare and touted as an accomplishment in the bogus war on manufactured terror. The Libyan dictator has wanted diplomatic relations with the United States since U.N. sanctions were imposed on the country in 1992. In fact, Libya has struggled for international legitimacy since 1986 when transnational oil corporations began abandoning the country, at least publicly.

Syria cooperated with the United States following the September attacks, but this did not prevent a propaganda campaign against the country, including the assertion (cooked up by the Israelis) that Iraq’s missing WMD were moved to Syria.

The Syria Accountability and Lebanese Sovereignty Restoration Act of 2003 was part of the effort to demonize the country and its leader, Bashar al-Assad.

In 2006, while speaking in Alabama, Gen. Wesley Clark recounted his conversation with a general at the Pentagon in November, 2001.

Gary Leupp quotes Clark:

I said, “Are we still going to invade Iraq?” “Yes, Sir,” he said, “but it’s worse than that.” I said, “How do you mean?” He held up this piece of paper. He said, “I just got this memo today or yesterday from the office of the Secretary of Defense upstairs. It’s a, it’s a five-year plan. We’re going to take down seven countries in five years. We’re going to start with Iraq, then Syria, Lebanon, then Libya, Somalia, Sudan, we’re going to come back and get Iran in five years. I said, “Is that classified, that paper?” He said, “Yes Sir.” I said, “Well, don’t show it to me, because I want to be able to talk about it.”

The Bush neocon clique considered the overthrow of Syria an important element in its war against Muslims and Arabs in the Middle East.

In late 2005, Richard Perle, at the time described as the Prince of Darkness, attended a meeting at the home of Farid Ghadry, the head of the Syrian Reform Party. Ghadry had met with Dick Cheney to strategize about regime change in Syria. He told the Wall Street Journal that Perle’s pal Ahmad Chalabi “paved the way in Iraq for what we want to do in Syria.” Ghadry was close to major players in the neocon think-tanks and foundations.

Or put more frankly, the Bush neocons and their “thinkers” (as Bush called them), envisioned the same sort of widespread destruction of civilian infrastructure, social support sytems and staggering loss of human life in Syria as they had successfully inflicted on Iraq.

Now we learn that this concerted effort to violate Syria’s national sovereignty and meddle in its internal affairs was passed on from the Bush neocons to apparatchiks in the Obama administration.

“The State Department has secretly funded Syrian opposition groups, according to diplomatic cables released by WikiLeaks,” the Washington Post reports today.

The cables reveal the State Department has funneled around $6 million since 2006 to a group of Syrian exiles to operate a London-based satellite channel, Barada TV, and finance activities inside Syria, according to the newspaper.



Syria is the next piece on the geopolitical chessboard.

Barada TV began broadcasting in April, 2009, and ramped up operations to cover the mass protests in Syria that began last month as part of a campaign by intelligence agencies to overthrow regimes in the Middle East. These color revolutions are supported by establishment NGOs and the CIA through USAID, the National Endowment for Democracy, and Freedom House. NED and NGOs are now used by the CIA as the preferred way to overthrow governments. Others claim Freedom House is a tool for the CIA and terrorists.

“What happened in Georgia with the Rose Revolution and Orange Revolution in Ukraine in 2003-2004 was part of a long-term strategy orchestrated by the Pentagon, the State Department and various US-financed NGOs like Freedom House and National Endowment for Democracy to create pro-NATO regime change in those former Soviet Union areas and to literally encircle Russia,” author and researcher William Engdahl told RT in January.

”What is going on in the Middle East with the Jasmine Revolution in Tunisia that we saw a few days ago, and now in Egypt with Mubarak in his 80s, and obviously a regime that is not exactly the most stable one, we have a food crisis taking place as a backdrop and the IMF coming and telling these countries to eliminate their state food subsidies so you have, of course, the explosive background for popular unrest. Within that you have these NGOs, like Freedom House, training activists and trade unions and various other organizations to demand democracy, demand human rights and so forth,” he added.

The Wikileaks cables reveal an intimate relationship between several Syrian exile groups and the State Department through a program called the Middle East Partnership Initiative. The State Department funneled money through the Democracy Council, a Los Angeles-based NGO. The group is praised by folks associated with the United Nations and RAND corporation.

According to the cables, the Democracy Council received $6.3 million from the State Department to run a Syria-related program called the “Civil Society Strengthening Initiative.” That program is described as “a discrete collaborative effort between the Democracy Council and local partners” to produce, among other things, “various broadcast concepts.” Other cables make clear that one of those concepts was Barada TV, according to the Post.

In late March, Secretary of Defense Gates instructed the Syrian military to depose leader Bashar al-Assad and “empower a revolution.”

“I’ve just come from Egypt, where the Egyptian army stood on the sidelines and allowed people to demonstrate and in fact empowered a revolution. The Syrians might take a lesson from that,” Gates added.

A CNN Arabic poll conducted in 2009 revealed that Syrian leader Assad is one of the most popular leaders in the Arab world.

---

 

CHRIS FLOYD
Empire Burlesque
April 18, 2011

Dear Good Concerned Engaged Enlightened Rule-of-Law Liberal Progressives: Is it clear enough for you now? Does he have to spell it out for you, slowly, using short and simple words, and maybe some cartoons to make it clear? Your noble Nobel Peace Laureate – bringer of hope and change, restorer of the rule of law, world-historical paradigm-shifter, etc., etc. – has just publicly (not to mention arbitrarily) committed the nation to “the supreme international crime”: aggressive war.

He has pledged the blood and treasure of the United States to “regime change” in Libya: that is to say, an act of military aggression designed to overthrow the government of a sovereign nation which has not attacked your own country nor posed the slightest threat to it. This is, of course, precisely the same blatantly illegal posture taken by that great monstrous bogey-man of all good concerned engaged enlightened rule-of-law liberal progressives everywhere, George W. Bush, in his invasion of Iraq.

On Friday, Barack Obama scribbled his name at the bottom of a newspaper article written by hired minions of the leaders of Britain and France, pledging to keep killing people in Libya until Moamar Gadafy is driven from power. Nothing short of “regime change” will satisfy these towering colossi of world statesmanship; as the Guardian reports, they utterly reject any calls “for an immediate ceasefire, or a negotiated exit for the Libyan dictator.”

Peace? Pah! No, it will be war, war, and more war until these leaders of the great Western democracies get the outcome they demand: the ouster of their clapped-out former client-tyrant, and his replacement by what they hope will be more amenable operators. Or is that too cynical? Surely what these Three Amigos of the Apocalypse are seeking is nothing less — and nothing other — than the “freedom of the Libyan people,” right?

You know, the kind of freedom where your leader can take your country into an open-ended campaign of military action without the consent of the people or the people’s representatives — and then escalate the conflict far beyond the mandate of an already rubbery UN resolution into outright, undeniable aggressive war, through the oh-so-constitutional method of … an op-ed piece in the Washington Post.

BBC, Libya, & Cluster Bombs - Tony Cartalucci | Globalists want to expand Libya war- rhetoric fortuitously changes in tandem.The ink was not even dry on the joint op-ed in New York Times written under the names of Obama, Sarkozy, and Cameron, when justification for their proposed expansion of the conflict was conveniently rolled out for public consumption.

Tony Cartalucci
Infowars.com
April 17, 2011

The ink was not even dry on the joint op-ed in New York Times written under the names of Obama, Sarkozy, and Cameron, when justification for their proposed expansion of the conflict was conveniently rolled out for public consumption. Reports by the corporate-financier funded Human Rights Watch immediately followed up calls to expand the mandate in Libya, claiming “cluster bombs” were being used in the city of Misrata.

The Libyan government has denied these allegations stating that, “To use these bombs, the evidence would remain for days and weeks, and we know the international community is coming en masse to our country soon. So we can’t do this, we can’t do anything that would incriminate us even if we were criminals.” With the globalists signaling the desire to expand the war and now overtly stating the operation will not end until Qaddafi is removed, the Libyan government would be foolish indeed to employ “cluster bombs,” especially after a series of victories over the rebels without using such weapons.

The BBC, and other corporate-owned media fronts, still maintain that Qaddafi is brutalizing his “own people,” even as video and pictures clearly show these “people” are armed rebels, who themselves admit ties to Al Qaeda and a desire to seize the nation by force. And despite wide ethical berths being given to NATO bombings that both the Libyan government and the rebels accuse of killing people on both sides, the same argument of “collateral damage” is purposefully and subjectively used against Libyan military forces.

Of course, the BBC shares responsibility for the unfolding bloodbath taking place in Libya and the ever expanding Western military intervention, having bombarded the public with a deluge of admittedly unverified reports – the very reports used to justify UNSC r.1973 in the first place. When the BBC isn’t participating in a propaganda campaign to justify foreign wars of aggression, they are taking money from the US State Department to assist in subversion around the globe. BBC’s membership in the Chatham House, a think-tank that represents the collective interests and ambitions of some of the largest corporations and banks on earth, might explain why it lacks any semblance of journalistic integrity and instead doggedly promotes the corporate-financier oligarchy’s agenda.

It should come to no one’s surprise then that the BBC, in tandem with the corporate-financier front Human Rights Watch, would come up with such convenient stories just in time to bolster the debate over expanded operations in Libya, including the possibility of using ground troops we were told would never set foot on Libyan soil. Additionally, the BBC is warning of a “Massacre in Misrata,” with a narrative so over-the-top it leaves impressionable readers almost begging for a NATO troop landing at Misrata’s port.

Once again, the global corporate-financier oligarchy has duped the people into another war. Once again petty prejudices and ignorance has been preyed upon, using party lines to manipulate and corral public opinion. Concurrently on the ground in Libya, the West has created a conflict observing the ancient maxim of Sun Tzu, “Throw your soldiers into positions whence there is no escape, and they will prefer death to flight,” ensuring both Qaddafi and the rebels are thrust into a do-or-die scenario guaranteeing the chaos continues until the globalists achieve their goal – nation re-building, seizing oil, central banks, etc.

Finally, we are made to believe our “leadership” is reacting to a fluid situation unfolding on the ground, when in reality they are executing an agenda that has been on the drawing board since at least 1991. Apparently voting for what we were told was the polar-opposite of George Bush and his Neo-Conservative agenda has not worked. We must then look past the puppet politicians and their superficial differences and see the corporate-financier oligarchy behind them, whose agenda transcends and dominates petty politics. We must see them as the problem, and replacing them entirely as the solution.

---

Globalist War Machine Fixates on Syria -Tony Cartalucci | Syria told to yield to “peaceful” arsonists or suffer Libya’s fate.

Tony Cartalucci
Infowars.com
April 17, 2011

With the war in Libya set only to expand, the precedent of attacking a sovereign nation based on unverified reports, to then assist foreign funded, armed insurrection is already being used to lay the groundwork for a similar campaign against Syria. The “Libyan Precedent” was already an articulated doctrine within the corporate-financier think-tanks long before Joe Lieberman and Nicolas Sarkozy began parroting it in speeches and interviews.

In a February 26, 2011 Brookings Institute report titled, “Libya’s Test of the New International Order,” the intervention in Libya was described as “a test that the international community has to pass.” Failure would “shake further the faith of the people’s region in the emerging international order and the primacy of international law.” Succeeding, the report would go on to say, would “demonstrably draw a line in the sand to deter other Arab autocrats who resort to attacking their people rather than dialogue and genuine reforms.” Of course by reforms, Brookings means integration into the “international system” its corporate-financier sponsorship lords over.

In late March after bombing began in Libya, Sarkozy of France would echo Brookings’ sentiments stating, “Every ruler should understand, and especially every Arab ruler should understand that the reaction of the international community and of Europe will from this moment on each time be the same: we will be on the side of peaceful protesters who must not be repressed with violence.” He would go on to say there is a “new post-UNSC 1973 model of “world governance.”"

During a Fox News interview, Joe Lieberman would also threaten Syria with a Libyan-style intervention. What Sarkozy and Lieberman both fail to point out is that the opposition in Syria is funded and supported, as is the opposition across the Arab world, by the same corporate-financier interests that hand them both their talking points. Much of the Syrian opposition is comprised of London-based activists, the Muslim Brotherhood, their “national coalition to support the youth,” and of course the admittedly US trained, funded, and equipped youth activists themselves.

Senator Joe Lieberman threatens military intervention
in Syria based on the “Libyan Precedent.”

Sarkozy and Lieberman also forget to mention the fact that these protesters are far from merely singing songs and carrying placards. Riots, violence, shootings, arson, and clashes with security forces and residents loyal to the Syrian government are being reported from across the country. In the city of Deraa, protesters torched the Baath Party headquarters and destroyed cars parked along the street, while two protesters were reportedly killed as they attempted to light ablaze another government building in the city of Latakia.

The protests are clearly not “peaceful,” rather marked
by violence and widespread arson.

It is difficult to understand how any responsible government should be expected to allow foreign funded mobs to commit widespread arson and vandalism with the expressed goal of removing the standing government from power. Doing so would embolden anyone with enough money from abroad to fund those willing to destroy property and risk lives locally in order to extort from the government their demands. It is also difficult to understand how these protesters are continuously labeled as “peaceful” by disingenuous meddlers and war mongers like Joe Lieberman and Nicolas Sarkozy.

The violence exhibited by the protesters is designed to intentionally provoke Syrian security forces attempting to maintain order. As security forces react, the corporate media and puppet politicians abroad attempt to leverage legitimacy away from Syria’s government, citing the violence as a potential impetus for expanded meddling and even military intervention.

To ensure the violence and chaos continues during a color revolution, provocateurs are often employed to kill protesters and security forces alike – as seen in Thailand on April 10, 2010, now with similar mystery gunmen turning up in Yemen and Syria. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton warned Syria yesterday to “refrain from any further violence against their own people,” to further reinforce the official “Libyan-esque” narrative.

As with Libya, we are made to believe our “leadership” is reacting to spontaneous events unfolding on the ground, when in reality they are executing an agenda that has been on the drawing board since at least 1991. We must then look past the puppet politicians and the corporate media who are merely repeating talking points, and instead focus on the corporate-financier oligarchs writing these talking points. We must see them as the problem, and understand that replacing them is the real revolution.

---

Probe into shocking film of ‘revenge attack’ on Iraqi civilian by British troops after the killing of six Red Caps

Shocking video footage which appears to show British soldiers beating an Iraqi civilian during the investigation into the murder of six of their fellow Servicemen is being examined by the Ministry of Defence.

UK Daily Mail
April 17, 2011

Shocking video footage which appears to show British soldiers beating an Iraqi civilian during the investigation into the murder of six of their fellow Servicemen is being examined by the Ministry of Defence.

The attack allegedly left the victim badly hurt, covered in blood and with his jaw ‘literally hanging off’. It was apparently recorded by one of the soldiers wearing a camera attached to his helmet.

An internal probe has begun into the circumstances surrounding the footage. The video was passed to The Mail on Sunday by an Army source, who claims that it was taken by soldiers from the Army’s Intelligence Corps following the killing of six British Military Policemen, known as Red Caps, by an Iraqi mob in 2003, soon after the end of the invasion.

WARNING: GRAPHIC VIDEO, VIEWER DISCRETION ADVISED

Full article here

It’s Official: “Arab Spring” Subversion U.S. Funded - As American bombs rain down upon Libya on the premise that Qaddafi was brutalizing indigenous pro-democratic demonstrators, the accusing fingers of Libya, Iran, China, Syria, Belarus, and a growing number of other nations are pointing at Washington for funding and plotting regime change against their respective governments.

Tony Cartalucci
Prisonplanet.com
April 16, 2011

As American bombs rain down upon Libya on the premise that Qaddafi was brutalizing indigenous pro-democratic demonstrators, the accusing fingers of Libya, Iran, China, Syria, Belarus, and a growing number of other nations are pointing at Washington for funding and plotting regime change against their respective governments. Either in an act of absolute hubris or to spin emerging evidence that the US indeed has been funding and preparing the ground for the “Arab Spring” for years, New York Times has recently published “U.S. Groups Helped Nurture Arab Uprisings.”

Essentially throwing these activists under the bus, New York Times exposes that the April 6Youth Movement in Egypt, the Bahrain Center for Human Rights, and Entsar Qadhi of Yemen amongst others, received training and financing from the International Republican Institute, the National Democratic Institute, and the Neo-Conservative lined Freedom House.

NGOs: an extension of US foreign policy.

The New York Times goes on to explain that these organizations are in turn funded by the National Endowment for Democracy which receives 100 million USD from Congress while Freedom House receives most of its money from the US State Department. While the New York Times asserts “no one doubts that the Arab uprisings are home grown,” leaders of groups now admittedly funded and trained by the US are anything but “home grown.” The most prominent example is the April 6 Movement of Egypt led by Mohamed ElBaradei of the International Crisis Group. ElBaradei sitting along side George Soros, Kenneth Adelman, Wesley Clark, and Zbigniew Brzezinski, within a US foreign policy think-tank engenders a considerable amount of “doubt.”

Also conceding involvement is the Project on Middle East Democracy (POMED), chaired byvarious Council on Foreign Relations and Brookings Institute alumni. POMED claims that they helped protesters develop skills and to network. Such training has taken place annually underMovements.org starting in 2008 where Egypt’s April 6 movement among many others, learned techniques to subvert their government. Movements.org of course is sponsored by a conglomerate of corporate and government agencies including the US State Department, Google, MTV, the Edelman public relations firm, Facebook, CBS News, MSNBC, Pepsi, and others. Despite the claim that such meddling is “promoting democracy,” looking at the sponsors and war mongering interests involved in this operation, it appears to be more about promoting global military and economic hegemony.

The role of NGOs and the so called “civil society” used to support the unrest is also included in the New York Times piece, as well as the displeasure expressed by Arab leaders berating the US for meddling in their internal affairs. Such accusations have now reach a crescendo withChina, Iran, Syria, and Belarus making similar claims.

The New York Times piece ends by describing cables indicating that many activists who became aware of US involvement in funding and directing the movements became disenfranchised. Such activists were “ousted.” Training was conducted outside of target countries, including in Jordan, Morocco, Serbia, and the United States. What the New York Times omits are the similar connections and involvements of corporate special interestssteering human rights organizations in support of this operation as well. Such involvement organizations had amply laid the rhetorical groundwork to justify the ever expanding war in Libya.

Of course, one needs only remember the feigned ignorance exhibited by the US State Department, Hillary Clinton, and Barak Obama, along with the litany of lies purveyed by the mainstream media to see a disingenuous plot in motion. This is because everyone from the US State Department and the corporate owned media had been involved, for years, preparing to bring the “Arab Spring” to fruition. With open admissions now being made by a global corporate-financier mouthpiece like the New York Times, one must consider the serious implications of what may come next.

Behold the circus that is the mainstream media. MSNBC feigns ignorance and confusion over unrest they had been involved in engineering since at least 2008.

Surely this information is going to incite a counterrevolution. In Egypt, suspicion over Mohamed ElBaradei has already seen the interloping globocrat pelted with rocks and his agenda derailed. Many activists truly believed in their cause and risked their lives for the idea that they were fighting not only their own corrupt dictatorships, but the West as well who had been propping them up for years. Such a perception was exasperated during the early stages of the of the uprisings with the West lavishing support on embattled regimes in order to maximize the disenfranchisement of the people. With ongoing operations to seize Libya by force, and to see through similar US backed uprisings in Syria, Yemen, Iran, and even as far asThailand and China, it will be interesting indeed to see how nation-states tailor their response to what is now clearly foreign funded subversion.

In what manner this realization will manifest itself in is not certain. However, it would be wise for activists, pundits, politicians, and concerned citizens genuinely interested in truth, to think very carefully before making their next move. As George Bush had once attempted to say, “fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me. ”

Ultimately, and upon examining the architects behind this global gambit of deceptive destabilization, we must look past the puppet politicians and the disingenuous liars that presume to give us “the news.” We must see the global corporate-financier empire as the source of the problem and its removal and replacement as the solution.

---

 

Egypt’s Revolution Doing Damage Control - Tony Cartalucci | It would be unfortunate indeed if Egyptians didn’t recognize the elementary propaganda being peddled before them.Bangkok, Thailand April 16, 2011 – Just as the subjects of foreign aid and Israel were used as rhetorical pawns to usher Hosni Mubarak out of power, the same two points of leverage are being used to bolster US International Crisis Group member Mohamed ElBaradei, his underling, Google executive Wael Ghonim and their sputtering revolution.

Tony Cartalucci
Infowars.com
April 16 2011

Just as the subjects of foreign aid and Israel were used as rhetorical pawns to usher Hosni Mubarak out of power, the same two points of leverage are being used to bolster US International Crisis Group member Mohamed ElBaradei, his underling, Google executive Wael Ghonim and their sputtering revolution.

It was only last month that ElBaradei came under attack by protesters who pelted him with rocks while astutely shouting “American agent” at the interloping globocrat. Fearing a counterrevolution and perhaps a real awakening in Egypt, ElBaradei became the recipient of yet another fortuitous Wikileaks release, this one claiming that the US was unhappy with ElBaradei during his stint at the UN IAEA. Perhaps to be on the safe side, ElBaradei resorted to the tried and true rallying cry used often by the very dictators the “Arab Spring” was supposed to replace, threatening war with Israel.

Of course, Mohamed ElBaradei sits within the US foreign policy think-tank International Crisis Group along with billionaire banker George Soros, US Army General Wesley Clark, geopolitical manipulator Zbigniew Brzezinski, former Foreign Minister of Israel Shlomo Ben-Ami, Bank of Israel governor Stanley Fischer, and current Israeli President Shimon Peres. The likelihood that he will start a war with Israel is so far-fetched it is insulting and speaks volumes of how little he thinks of those who have misplaced their trust in him.

More recently, ElBaradei’s personal webmaster, campaign organizer, and revolutionary leader, Wael Ghonim, has been pulling similar stunts to gain political points amongst a constituency he must consider profoundly ignorant and impressionable. Coming just one day after the New York Times reported US money, training, and assistance was behind the “Arab Spring,” Ghonim was attending an IMF annual meeting in Washington to trade barbs with the IMF managing director. Ironically, Ghonim, working directly for a US stooge and with the now openly US-funded April 6 Movement, attempted to impress upon the IMF the necessity to “let the Egyptians solve their own problems.”

Fresh food that lasts from eFoods Direct (Ad)

It would be unfortunate indeed if Egyptians didn’t recognize the elementary propaganda being peddled before them. Should the Egyptians fail to dislodge these two disingenuous parasites and the global corporate-financier interests driving them, we can rest assured the globalists, after installing their “civil society” and implementing free-trade, will consume Egypt in its entirety. The global corporate-financier oligarchy are, as one wise man once put it, locusts in three-piece suits. They will consume until we either remove their source of subsistence from them, or they devour everything and everyone in sight.

Star of Egyptian revolt blasts world’s elites as “partners in crime” - The Google executive who became the hero of the Egyptian revolution cropped up at the pinnacle of international finance Friday, chiding the elites for supporting strongman Hosni Mubarak.

AFP
April 16, 2011

The Google executive who became the hero of the Egyptian revolution cropped up at the pinnacle of international finance Friday, chiding the elites for supporting strongman Hosni Mubarak.

“I actually feel like Joe the Plumber,” said Wael Ghonim, drawing laughs after his introduction on a panel at the International Monetary Fund headquarters.

The inside-America reference to a plumber whose videotaped questioning of presidential candidate Barack Obama propelled him to national fame was a savvy setup for his participation on the high-level panel on youth and jobs in the Middle East and North Africa.

Dressed in faded Levis, an open-necked striped shirt and casual loafers, Ghonim, 30, filled his billing as “Internet activist” in the roundtable discussion notably featuring IMF chief Dominique Strauss-Kahn.

Ghonim, Google’s head of marketing for the Middle East and North Africa, became an Internet star after administering a Facebook page that helped spark the uprising that toppled Mubarak’s regime.

Full article here

 

Blood Bonanza: UK private security firms eye Libya as new cash cow - Libya might soon turn into a goldmine for private security firms. Reports say that the UK is already hiring mercenaries to protect the interests of the big corporations there, once Colonel Gaddafi goes. But there are fears their chequered history in previous interventions could turn this civil-war-torn country – into a proper Wild West.

RT
April 15, 2011

Libya might soon turn into a goldmine for private security firms. Reports say that the UK is already hiring mercenaries to protect the interests of the big corporations there, once Colonel Gaddafi goes. But there are fears their chequered history in previous interventions could turn this civil-war-torn country – into a proper Wild West.

---

Michael Scheuer: ‘US depended on tyrannies’ - Mainstream media would suggest NATO is taking every effort to protect the civilians in Libya. Is the democracy and humanitarian aid blossoming amid the Egypt disposal of Hosni Mubarak and NATO’s “friendly” air attacks on Libya? So far it looks more like an instability.

RT
April 15, 2011

Mainstream media would suggest NATO is taking every effort to protect the civilians in Libya. Is the democracy and humanitarian aid blossoming amid the Egypt disposal of Hosni Mubarak and NATO’s “friendly” air attacks on Libya? So far it looks more like an instability. The Obama administration distanced itself from the Alliance actions, saying they have nothing to do with the organization. Michael Scheuer, former CIA intelligence officer, who was also the organization’s chief of the Bin Laden Unit, explains.

---

Madsen: Social networks are linked to CIA

Are the methods the US is using, namely technically training activists in the Middle East, underminding the sovereignty of the countries there? Who is behind the Soros Foundation, Twitter and Facebook? Who is making up the flash mobs, allegedly organized in Egypt, Tunisia and Libya, where the Internet connection has been shut since the riots broke out? Wayne Madsen, investigative journalist, is sharing his opinion with RT on the issue.

RT
April 15, 2011

---

Ex-CIA officer: Obama fools himself, Muslims see US bombing Libya - Libyan state TV reports eight NATO strikes on the capital Tripoli have caused numerous injuries among civilians. Latest pictures from the capital show smoke rising above the buildings following the attack.

RT
April 15, 2011

Libyan state TV reports eight NATO strikes on the capital Tripoli have caused numerous injuries among civilians. Latest pictures from the capital show smoke rising above the buildings following the attack. Local media claims one of the coalition bombs hit the residence of Colonel Gaddafi. Meanwhile, NATO officials have announced plans to continue their operation until Libyan forces stop attacking civilians and retreat. At today’s meeting in Berlin, members of the alliance discussed what contribution each state needs to make, with only 6 out of the 28 involved conducting air strikes. The UK and France have been calling on other countries to increase military pressure on Colonel Muammar Gaddafi. For more, RT talks to former CIA counterterrorism analyst Michael Scheuer.

---

Libya: The Hard-Sell is Coming

Now it IS regime change: Cameron, Obama and Sarkozy promise to keep bombing Libya until Gaddafi is gone

David Cameron, Barack Obama and Nicolas Sarkozy upped the stakes in the Libya conflict last night as they vowed to fight on until Colonel Gaddafi is ousted.

TIM SHIPMAN and JAMES CHAPMAN
UK Daily Mail
April 15, 2011

David Cameron, Barack Obama and Nicolas Sarkozy upped the stakes in the Libya conflict last night as they vowed to fight on until Colonel Gaddafi is ousted.

In a joint article, the British, American and French leaders warned it would be an ‘unconscionable betrayal’ were Nato to stop bombing with the dictator still in power.

Gaddafi must ‘go and go for good’ before rebuilding of the country could begin, they said, rejecting calls for an immediate ceasefire.

However the highly unusual joint statement did little to paper over behind-the-scenes bickering over how to advance the military mission.

It will also fuel the concerns of critics who say the aims of the conflict are becoming dangerously blurred.

Full article here

Russia: NATO gone too far in Libya

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov says NATO’s military intervention in oil-rich Libya has gone far beyond the mandate authorized by the United Nations.

Press TV
April 15, 2011

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov says NATO’s military intervention in oil-rich Libya has gone far beyond the mandate authorized by the United Nations.

After talks with NATO counterparts in Berlin on Friday, Lavrov also called for an urgent shift towards a political and diplomatic settlement in Libya, AFP reported.

The remarks come as at least eight revolutionaries have been killed in fresh shelling of the western city of Misratah by forces loyal to the Libyan ruler Muammar Gaddafi.

Heavy fighting continued around Misratah on Friday as Gaddafi loyalists fired dozens of rockets at the coastal city.

On Thursday, NATO member states rejected a call by France and Britain to step up attacks on Libya, widening the rift in the Western military alliance over the strategy in the North African country.

Thousands of civilians have been killed since Western warplanes began their air assaults on Libya last month under a UN no-fly zone mandate.

Libyan anti-government forces, inspired by revolutions that toppled authoritarian rulers in neighboring Tunisia and Egypt, are fighting to topple Gaddafi, who has ruled the country for over 41 years.

US hints long presence in Afghanistan

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has once again shied away from expounding on a timeline about the US military pullout from war-weary Afghanistan.

Press TV
April 15, 2011

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has once again shied away from expounding on a timeline about the US military pullout from war-weary Afghanistan.

“We need to underscore that we are transitioning, not leaving,” AFP quoted Clinton as saying at a meeting of NATO foreign ministers in Berlin on Thursday.

“For the transition to be sustainable and irreversible and for reconciliation and diplomacy to bear fruit, we must sustain our efforts,” she added.

The top US diplomat claimed the fight against militants in Afghanistan has made progress in the past 15 months. However, US Democrat lawmakers have rejected the upbeat government assessment of progress in Afghanistan, pointing out that 2010 has been the deadliest year for both Afghan people and US soldiers.

Clinton also warned of a “violent spring fighting season” in Afghanistan, saying that the withdrawal of troops will benefit the Taliban as there is the possibility of a rise in the militants’ attacks.

Since 2009, Washington has tripled the number of US troops in Afghanistan to 100,000. The Obama Administration had promised to begin a drawdown of troop levels in July but later announced that US forces would leave in 2014.

The US has plans to set up permanent military bases in Afghanistan, claiming the bases are aimed at fighting the Taliban and al-Qaeda. However, the plan has spawned outrage and criticism from Afghan people and officials who insist that they will never succumb to the subjection of foreigners.

At least 1,424 American soldiers have been killed in Afghanistan since the US-led invasion of the country began in 2001, according to a recent report by the Associated Press.

Ellen Brown
webofdebt.com
April 14, 2011

Several writers have noted the odd fact that the Libyan rebels took time out from their rebellion in March to create their own central bank – this before they even had a government. Robert Wenzel wrote in the Economic Policy Journal:

I have never before heard of a central bank being created in just a matter of weeks out of a popular uprising. This suggests we have a bit more than a rag tag bunch of rebels running around and that there are some pretty sophisticated influences.

Alex Newman wrote in the New American:

In a statement released last week, the rebels reported on the results of a meeting held on March 19. Among other things, the supposed rag-tag revolutionaries announced the “[d]esignation of the Central Bank of Benghazi as a monetary authority competent in monetary policies in Libyaand appointment of a Governor to the Central Bank of Libya, with a temporary headquarters in Benghazi.”

Newman quoted CNBC senior editor John Carney, who asked, “Is this the first time a revolutionary group has created a central bank while it is still in the midst of fighting the entrenched political power? It certainly seems to indicate how extraordinarily powerful central bankers have become in our era.”

Another anomaly involves the official justification for taking up arms against Libya. Supposedly it’s about human rights violations, but the evidence is contradictory. According to an article on the Fox News website on February 28:

As the United Nations works feverishly to condemn Libyan leader Muammar al-Qaddafi for cracking down on protesters, the body’s Human Rights Council is poised to adopt a report chock-full of praise for Libya’s human rights record.

The review commends Libya for improving educational opportunities, for making human rights a “priority” and for bettering its “constitutional” framework. Several countries, including Iran, Venezuela, North Korea, and Saudi Arabia but also Canada, give Libya positive marks for the legal protections afforded to its citizens — who are now revolting against the regime and facing bloody reprisal.Whatever might be said of Gaddafi, the Libyan people seem to be thriving. A delegation of medical professionals from Russia,Ukraine and Belarus wrote in an appeal to Russian President Medvedev and Prime Minister Putin that after becoming acquainted with Libyan life, it was their view that in few nations did people live in such comfort:

[Libyans] are entitled to free treatment, and their hospitals provide the best in the world of medical equipment. Education inLibya is free, capable young people have the opportunity to study abroad at government expense. When marrying, young couples receive 60,000 Libyan dinars (about 50,000 U.S. dollars) of financial assistance. Non-interest state loans, and as practice shows, undated. Due to government subsidies the price of cars is much lower than in Europe, and they are affordable for every family. Gasoline and bread cost a penny, no taxes for those who are engaged in agriculture. The Libyan people are quiet and peaceful, are not inclined to drink, and are very religious.

They maintained that the international community had been misinformed about the struggle against the regime. “Tell us,” they said, “who would not like such a regime?”

Even if that is just propaganda, there is no denying at least one very popular achievement of the Libyan government: it broughtwater to the desert by building the largest and most expensive irrigation project in history, the $33 billion GMMR (Great Man-Made River) project. Even more than oil, water is crucial to life in Libya. The GMMR provides 70 percent of the population with water for drinking and irrigation, pumping it from Libya’s vast underground Nubian Sandstone Aquifer System in the south to populated coastal areas 4,000 kilometers to the north. The Libyan government has done at least some things right.

Another explanation for the assault on Libya is that it is “all about oil,” but that theory too is problematic. As noted in the National Journal, the country produces only about 2 percent of the world’s oil. Saudi Arabia alone has enough spare capacity to make up for any lost production if Libyan oil were to disappear from the market. And if it’s all about oil, why the rush to set up a new central bank?

Another provocative bit of data circulating on the Net is a 2007 “Democracy Now” interview of U.S. General Wesley Clark (Ret.). In it he says that about 10 days after September 11, 2001, he was told by a general that the decision had been made to go to war with Iraq. Clark was surprised and asked why. “I don’t know!” was the response. “I guess they don’t know what else to do!” Later, the same general said they planned to take out seven countries in five years: Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Iran.

What do these seven countries have in common? In the context of banking, one that sticks out is that none of them is listed among the 56 member banks of the Bank for International Settlements (BIS). That evidently puts them outside the long regulatory arm of the central bankers’ central bank in Switzerland.

The most renegade of the lot could be Libya and Iraq, the two that have actually been attacked. Kenneth Schortgen Jr., writingon Examiner.com, noted that “[s]ix months before the US moved into Iraq to take down Saddam Hussein, the oil nation had made the move to accept Euros instead of dollars for oil, and this became a threat to the global dominance of the dollar as the reserve currency, and its dominion as the petrodollar.”

According to a Russian article titled “Bombing of Lybia – Punishment for Ghaddafi for His Attempt to Refuse US Dollar,” Gadaffi made a similarly bold move: he initiated a movement to refuse the dollar and the euro, and called on Arab and African nations to use a new currency instead, the gold dinar. Gadaffi suggested establishing a united African continent, with its 200 million people using this single currency. During the past year, the idea was approved by many Arab countries and most African countries. The only opponents were the Republic of South Africa and the head of the League of Arab States. The initiative was viewed negatively by the USA and the European Union, with French president Nicolas Sarkozy calling Libya a threat to the financial security of mankind; but Gaddafi was not swayed and continued his push for the creation of a united Africa.

And that brings us back to the puzzle of the Libyan central bank. In an article posted on the Market Oracle, Eric Encina observed:

One seldom mentioned fact by western politicians and media pundits: the Central Bank of Libya is 100% State Owned. . . .Currently, the Libyan government creates its own money, the Libyan Dinar, through the facilities of its own central bank. Few can argue that Libya is a sovereign nation with its own great resources, able to sustain its own economic destiny. One major problem for globalist banking cartels is that in order to do business with Libya, they must go through the Libyan Central Bank and its national currency, a place where they have absolutely zero dominion or power-broking ability. Hence, taking down the Central Bank of Libya (CBL) may not appear in the speeches of Obama, Cameron and Sarkozy but this is certainly at the top of the globalist agenda for absorbing Libya into its hive of compliant nations.

Libya not only has oil. According to the IMF, its central bank has nearly 144 tons of gold in its vaults. With that sort of asset base, who needs the BIS, the IMF and their rules?

All of which prompts a closer look at the BIS rules and their effect on local economies. An article on the BIS website states that central banks in the Central Bank Governance Network are supposed to have as their single or primary objective “to preserve price stability.” They are to be kept independent from government to make sure that political considerations don’t interfere with this mandate. “Price stability” means maintaining a stable money supply, even if that means burdening the people with heavy foreign debts. Central banks are discouraged from increasing the money supply by printing money and using it for the benefit of the state, either directly or as loans.

In a 2002 article in Asia Times titled “The BIS vs National Banks,” Henry Liu maintained:

BIS regulations serve only the single purpose of strengthening the international private banking system, even at the peril of national economies. The BIS does to national banking systems what the IMF has done to national monetary regimes. National economies under financial globalization no longer serve national interests.

. . . FDI [foreign direct investment] denominated in foreign currencies, mostly dollars, has condemned many national economies into unbalanced development toward export, merely to make dollar-denominated interest payments to FDI, with little net benefit to the domestic economies.
He added, “Applying the State Theory of Money, any government can fund with its own currency all its domestic developmental needs to maintain full employment without inflation.” The “state theory of money” refers to money created by governments rather than private banks.

The presumption of the rule against borrowing from the government’s own central bank is that this will be inflationary, while borrowing existing money from foreign banks or the IMF will not. But all banks actually create the money they lend on their books, whether publicly-owned or privately-owned. Most new money today comes from bank loans. Borrowing it from the government’s own central bank has the advantage that the loan is effectively interest-free. Eliminating interest has been shown to reduce the cost of public projects by an average of 50%.

And that appears to be how the Libyan system works. According to Wikipedia, the functions of the Central Bank of Libya include “issuing and regulating banknotes and coins in Libya” and “managing and issuing all state loans.” Libya’s wholly state-owned bank can and does issue the national currency and lend it for state purposes.

That would explain where Libya gets the money to provide free education and medical care, and to issue each young couple $50,000 in interest-free state loans. It would also explain where the country found the $33 billion to build the Great Man-Made River project. Libyans are worried that NATO-led air strikes are coming perilously close to this pipeline, threatening another humanitarian disaster.

So is this new war all about oil or all about banking? Maybe both – and water as well. With energy, water, and ample credit to develop the infrastructure to access them, a nation can be free of the grip of foreign creditors. And that may be the real threat of Libya: it could show the world what is possible. Most countries don’t have oil, but new technologies are being developed that could make non-oil-producing nations energy-independent, particularly if infrastructure costs are halved by borrowing from the nation’s own publicly-owned bank. Energy independence would free governments from the web of the international bankers, and of the need to shift production from domestic to foreign markets to service the loans.

If the Gaddafi government goes down, it will be interesting to watch whether the new central bank joins the BIS, whether the nationalized oil industry gets sold off to investors, and whether education and health care continue to be free.

Patrick Henningsen
Infowars.com
April 13, 2011

The question as to why US-led NATO forces are determined to engineer a regime change in Libya is now becoming clear. Whilst media pundits and political experts still argue over whether the Libyan rebel gangs are actually being backed and directed by US, UK and Israel intelligence agencies, broader long-range Western policy objectives for Libya are being completely ignored.

One only has to read the strategic briefings in U.S. AFRICOM documents to realise the true endgame in Libya: the control of valuable resources and the eviction of China from North Africa.

When the US formed AFRICOM in 2007, some 49 countries signed on to the US military charter for Africa but one country refused: Libya. Such a treacherous act by Libya’s leader Moummar Qaddafi would only sow the seeds for a future conflict down the road in 2011.

NATO: It’s been reduced to a mere private security force for western corporate interests.

According to Dr Paul Craig Roberts, the situation with Qaddafi is much different than the other recent protests in the Arab world. “Why is NATO there?” has become to real question, says Roberts, who fears that risky involvement stemming from American influence could lead to catastrophic breaking point in Libya.



WHY WE ARE IN LIBYA: a revealing interview with Dr Paul Craig Roberts.

CHINESE INTERESTS IN LIBYA

According to Bejing’s Ministry of Commerce, China’s current contracts in Libya number no less than 50 large projects involving a contracts in excess of 18 billion USD. What is even more revealing here is that due to the recent instability in the North African region, China’s investments have taken a serious hit. The recent political turmoil in the region has caused China’s foreign contracted projects to drop with new contracts amounting to $ 3,470,000,000, down 53.2%. Among them, the amount of new contracts in Libya, down by 45.3%, 13.9% less turnover; to Algeria, the amount of the contract fell 97.1%, turnover decreased by 10.7% – all within the first 2 months of this year.

In addition to the numerous Chinese investments in Libya, the North African nation has also recently completed one of the most expensive and advance water works projects in world history- Libya’s Great Man Made River. A 30 year venture, finished only last year, gives Libya the potential for an agricultural and economic boom that would certainly mean trouble for competing agri-markets in neighbouring Israel and Egypt. It could also transform Libya into the emerging “bread basket” of Africa. With global food prices on the rise, and Libya possessing a stable currency and cheap domestic energy supply, it doesn’t take an economic genius to see what role Libya could play in the global market place.


VALUABLE ASSET: Libya’s Great Man Made River.

Central to AFRICOM’s strategic goals is to confront the increasing Chinese influence on the continent. One AFRICOM study suggests that China will eventually dispatch troops to Africa to defend its interests there:

“Now China has achieved a stage of economic development which requires endless supplies of African raw materials and has started to develop the capacity to exercise influence in most corners of the globe. The extrapolation of history predicts that distrust and uncertainty will inevitably lead the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to Africa in staggering numbers…”

So we have a vocalised fear on the part of US military planners, of a military confrontation with China… in Africa. Today it’s Libya, but tomorrow, it will be in Sudan. Does this sound a little familiar? Well, it should…

THE NEW COLD WAR WITH CHINA

What this data does show clearly is that the strategic policy objectives outlined in Washington’s AFRICOM, particularly those ones designed to confront and minimise China’s economic interest in Africa, are working well as a result of instability in the region. In effect, what we are witnessing here is the dawn of a new Cold War between the US-EURO powers and China. This new cold war will feature many of the same elements of the long and protracted US-USSR face-off we saw in the second half of the 20th century. It will take place off shore, in places like Africa, South America, Central Asia and through old flashpoints like Korea and the Middle East.

AFRICOM: outlining America’s new military playground.

What makes this new cold war much deeper and more subtle than the previous one, is that it will not be cloaked in a popular ideology like ‘Capitalism vs Communism’. This new war is all about one thing: natural resources. The capture and control of the world’s remaining resources and energy supplies will be the theme which will govern- and literally fuel, all major conflicts in the 21st century. It will be fought through numerous proxies, and on far-flung pitches across the globe but it will never be spoken of by the White House Press Secretary or the Foreign Office in Downing Street.



Early reports out of Libya confirm that “Rebels” are being backed and directed by Western intelligence agencies.

INSURGENTS NOT PROTESTORS

The great PR spin trick in the run up to NATO’s carpet bombing run in Libya was the West’s ability to characterise Libya’s violent armed gangs as mere protestors. The average American, British or French media consumer equated the Libyan uprising with those previously in Tunisia and Egypt. Then reality of course was that they were anything but. However, the bells of freedom and democracy had indeed rung, so all that was really needed at that point was a clever WMD-like diplomatic trick to dazzle the rows of intellectually challenged diplomats at the UN in New York City. The ‘No Fly Zone’ was repackaged and worked well enough for politicians to get their foot in the door to their respective War Rooms.

It seems to have worked so far but the next phase- ground troops and a NATO military occupation of Libya, will be somewhat more complicated to execute without sustaining heavy political fallout. All of these complexed efforts are used to shroud western corporate and military long-term agendas in the region, all part and parcel of the New Resources Cold War with China.

A military and CIA advocate appears on CNN to promote the White House party line on regime change.

HISTORY IS STILL A BITCH

Few will argue that the average western observer and mainstream media consumer suffers from chronic historical amnesia. For Americans in particular, relevant history only extends as far back as the previous season of Dancing With the Stars, or American Idol. Some might argue that this is by design, that on whole the masses have been conditioned to be passive actors in the new media-rich modern democracy because it makes managing the herds much easier.

The lessons of Afghanistan and Iraq have yet to return home for the US and Great Britain- both projects are still going concerns for the massive cartel of western corporations. This has allowed ambitious bureaucrats in Washington, London and Paris to try their hand again in Libya. In time however, Americans and Europeans will come to learn what ever citizen and subject already learned many times over throughout history. In theory it may work, but in practice, “Occupation” is a paradox. The US-UK may draw plans in private to occupy an Iraq or a Libya indefinitely but history doesn’t jibe with these imperial ambitions.

It will end one day, and end badly because the Neo-Roman Anglo-American Empire with all its legions abroad, cannot manage its fragile domestic affair back at home. First comes the fall of the Senate, then the rise of the Caesar, and finally the collapse of the Denarius($) at home. The once great empire goes out with a whimper- too fat and too bankrupt to carry on.

As the Great Resource Wars of the 21st century continue to rage on unabated, one question comes to mind: what will mindful citizens in the aggressor countries do to change this present course of history? Judging by ease at which the West managed to pull of their latest heist in Libya, I would say… very little right now.

Syrian soldiers shot for refusing to fire on protesters - Syrian soldiers have been shot by security forces after refusing to fire on protesters, witnesses said, as a crackdown on anti-government demonstrations intensified.

Katherine Marsh
London Guardian
April 13, 2011

Syrian soldiers have been shot by security forces after refusing to fire on protesters, witnesses said, as a crackdown on anti-government demonstrations intensified.

Witnesses told al-Jazeera and the BBC that some soldiers had refused to shoot after the army moved into Banias in the wake of intense protests on Friday.

Human rights monitors named Mourad Hejjo, a conscript from Madaya village, as one of those shot by security snipers. “His family and town are saying he refused to shoot at his people,” said Wassim Tarif, a local human rights monitor.

Footage on YouTube shows an injured soldier saying he was shot in the back by security forces, while another video shows the funeral of Muhammad Awad Qunbar, who sources said was killed for refusing to fire on protesters. Signs of defections will be worrying to Syria’s regime. State media reported a different version of events, claiming nine soldiers had been killed in an ambush by an armed group in Banias. Full article here

---

China Calls it a Western Plot - Destabilizing China and attempting to overthrow a government of 1.3 billion people most certainly is a grievous act of war. Add to that operations unfolding across Africa, the Middle East, Southeast Asia, Eastern Europe and South America and you have a recipe for World War III.

Tony Cartalucci
Prisonplanet.com
April 13, 2011

Destabilizing China and attempting to overthrow a government of 1.3 billion people most certainly is a grievous act of war. Add to that operations unfolding across Africa, the Middle East, Southeast Asia, Eastern Europe and South America and you have a recipe for World War III.

While initially passed off as spontaneous, wholly organic uprisings, the smirking corporate-financier oligarchs are now conceding that indeed they have meticulously planned, trained, funded, and supported uprisingsfrom Tunisia to Egypt, fromTehran and Belarus toBurma and Beijing. With Western forces storming Libya and the Ivory Coast from above, they are signaling their will to bring their global campaign from proxy forces on the ground to armed intervention, with Iraq and Afghanistan proving their will to invade and occupy as the truest expression of imperial ambition.

International Reaction

While Clinton and Obama talk about the “one voice” the world speaks with, in reality they are referring to the US, UK, EU and their coalition of the coerced. When the UNSC r.1973 regarding using force against Libya was brought to vote, Russia, China, India, Brazil and even Germany abstained. And while the US did indeed vote “yes” they did so without consulting the nation’s legislative branch, circumventing their own national constitution to illegally ramrod the intervention through.

China, after being targeted by similar “revolutionary” activities as seen in the Middle East and Northern Africa has now accused the United States of “using the issue of human rights reports to interfere in other countries’ internal affairs.” It should be noted that these “reports” come from entirely disingenuous corporate-funded organizations. It should also be noted that indeed the US has now admitted to funding activist groups and equipping them with technology to organize and carry out subversive activities within their respective countries.

The Washington Post in March 2011 reported that the US State Department, US Department of Defense, and Broadcasting Board of Governors, upon which Secretary of State Hillary Clintonsits as a director, are funding tech firms providing dissidents with means to undermine their governments in Libya, Tunisia, Egypt, and even China. More recently an AFP report in April 2011 reported that the US State Department has also been providing training to thousands of dissents at locations around the world before sending them back to undermine the respective governments. Tunisia, Egypt, Syria, Iran, and China are all listed as nations targeted by the US State Department’s activities.
So it comes as a surprise to see US foreign policy think-tanks like the “Neo-Conservative” PNAC redux Foreign Policy Initiative (FPI) propose that China is “paranoid” for calling these openly admitted US funded destabilizations a “vast Western conspiracy.” FPI has also concluded that not only is China’s response to openly foreign-funded sedition unreasonable, but such a response demands further action to be taken by the United States. Such brazen hubris can only be expected from a group consisting of global elitists who have neither paid the cost of their agenda financially nor shouldered a rifle to defend it.

Many of the “activists” at the center of the US State Department’s concerted attack on China are being granted “pro-bono” legal aid form the globalist “Freedom Now” organization, funded and lined by Council on Foreign Relations members and corporate funded foundations.

From a March 2011 Land Destroyer report “Target China:”

The corporate-financier run Western media has been recently beating their chests over the imprisonment of Nobel Laureate and “human rights activist” Liu Xiaobo, a proponent of ending China’s strong central government and politically active military in favor of a weak, Western-style system run by corruptible, feckless, incompetent leadership that invites multinational corporations to entropically infest state institutions and seize control of the nation’s people and resources. Liu Xiaobo’s support goes beyond the media’s scornful chastisement of China’s government on his behalf, and includes “pro-bono” legal aid from theCouncil on Foreign Relations lined “Freedom Now” organization. Readers may remember “Freedom Now” from their extensive involvement in supporting the Syrian opposition leading the recent unrest against the Assad government.

Freedom Now is also providing legal services for Gao Zhisheng, a human rights lawyer also imprisoned in China. Gao had written an open letter to the US Congress detailing human rights violations in China, and his family currently resides in the United States. Council on Foreign Relations minion Jerome Cohen, Canadian MP Irwin Cotler, and former Canadian MP David Kilgour are personally leading the campaigns for both Liu Ziaobo and Gao Zhisheng. All three, are also involved in meddling around the globe in similarly hypocritical gambits revolving around “human rights activists” who just so happen to be fighting governments the West would like to see changed.

While it may seem noble to champion for human rights, it is a matter of fact that men like Cohen, Cotler, and Kilgour, and the entire Freedom Now organization along with the CFR that populates its membership and the foundations that fund it, are amongst the greatest enemies of human rights and human freedom on earth. The Council on Foreign Relations has tirelessly repeated its goal of establishing a one world government, with members working ceaselessly to achieve it and their publications over the decades perpetually reflecting this ambition. This is a world government that is of, by, and for the corporate-financier oligarchy’s interests, and their interests alone.

China’s Response

China has now openly charged the West with interfering in their internal affairs. In a recent Reuters report, “China crackdown driven by fears of a broad conspiracy,” it stated that “Chinese leaders believe domestic foes, their foreign backers and Western governments are scheming to undermine and ultimately topple the Communist Party. Recent speeches and articles from security officials echo with warnings of subversive plots backed by Western “anti-China” forces.”

Indeed, considering the evidence both openly admitted and being carried out through less visible channels like the Freedom Now organization, this is more than a paranoid conspiracy theory, it is a stated fact that indicates China is not only aware of what is happening inside their own country, but also who is really behind it.

The Reuters report continues by stating, “But what outsiders may see as a loose, disparate group of dissidents, bloggers, lawyers, and grassroots agitators, China’s security police treat as a subversive, Western-backed coalition with the potential to erupt into outright opposition.” The reality is that these groups are only seen as being a loose, disparate opposition because the Western media is portraying them as such, even in light of recent admissions from the State Department on the contrary.

China, according to the Reuters report, “view that “color revolutions” that swept Central Asia several years ago were Western-promoted rehearsals for a similar subversive assault on China.” All evidence clearly says that these were Western created, funded, and supported organizations operating in Serbia in 2000 as the Otpor movement, which later became CANVAS, training protesters from the Ukraine, Belarus, and Georgia, and more recently from Tunisia and Egypt. The scale on which organizations like CANVAS meddle across the globe is admitted in Foreign Policy’s “Revolution U” article where CANVAS claims to have worked with groups from over 50 other countries.

Iran & Syria

China then is not simply paranoid but grappling with a very real, concerted effort to destabilize its 1.3 billion population and collapse its government. Joining China in its condemnation of the West’s meddling is Iran which has recently stated that the unrest in Syria is also a Western plot. The evidence is overwhelming, with Syrian opposition amongst the many receiving aid to destabilize and topple their governments from the US, and opposition parties on the ground with leadership operating out of the US and London.

Iran itself was the subject of a 156 page Brookings Institute Report titled “Which Path to Persia?” detailing the use of covert military operations, foreign-backed color revolutions, sanctions, and outright military invasion to topple the Iranian government and institute regime change. Much of what was detailed in the report has already begun to unfold not only in Iran but in Libya as well.

Belarus

Belarus, also the target of US funded CANVAS trained mobs, foreign funded opposition,sanctions, and Congressional resolutions declaring the Belarusian government “illegitimate,” has also made statements that the unrest in their nation was the result of a Western plot. Quite clearly it is, and with the recent bombing of Minsk’s subway resulting in the death of 12, Belarus’ government has reiterated the fact that it is a target of Western destabilization with President Alexander Lukashenko specifically saying the bombing may have been “a gift from abroad.”

Joe Liberman betrays his mandate given by the American people and the US Constitution to explainhis resolution of incorporating Belarus into the “Euro-Atlantic world.” The US has spent years trying to absorb the former Soviet territories into the “Washington Consensus.”

Implications

The charade is over, and the reality of global confrontation between the West and the world it presumes dominion over is beginning. What was once eluded to only within the halls of think-tanks and obscure commentary is now headline news. For the people of the world, it would be beneficial to recognize it is not servile, feckless politicians like Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, or Joe Liberman that are responsible for this confrontation. It is the multinational corporate-financier oligarchs that transcend borders and to a certain degree already dominate this planet.

Identifying them is the first step to stopping them. Full-spectrum boycotts and campaigns to eliminate and replace their presence within our local communities is what we can start doing today. Politicians afar can be compromised and coerced and cannot be looked to in order to solve our problems, we must look within ourselves and to our communities. We can either do this now, or face the consequences of being bled financially and quite literally as this confrontation intensifies.

---

 

Roberts: Pentagon budget is the result of corruption - Half a century ago, president Dwight Eisenhower issued a warning to the American nation about growing military industrial complexes being a threat to democracy, and now it seems as though Eisenhower’s warning has become reality. US is the modern world’s biggest military spender. Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, a former Reagan administration official and a columnist, shares his opinion on RT.

---

‘Depleted uranium’s toxic legacy to poison Libya for 40 years’ - Military experts are accusing coalition forces in Libya of using depleted uranium in their air strikes. The deadly substance can cause cancer and physical mutations in those who come into close contact with it.

RT
April 13, 2011

Military experts are accusing coalition forces in Libya of using depleted uranium in their air strikes. The deadly substance can cause cancer and physical mutations in those who come into close contact with it. The claims are surfacing as the ongoing NATO-led campaign is being stepped up with no clear end in sight. Journalist Conn Hallinan says Washington is selling depleted uranium bombs to its NATO allies, and the ill effects of the controversial weapon will be felt in Libya for decades to come

Both are experts on the toxic munitions, having been part of clear up teams in Kuwait and Iraq in the early 1990s. If their analysis is accurate, Libyan civilians, just like Iraqis, particularly in Falluja where thousands of DU rounds were used by US forces, face increased levels of cancers, leukemia and infant abnormalities. While suggestions that US and British ground troops could soon be shipped to Libya are being bandied around by generals and government officials, The UK is also floating the idea of employing private military contractors inside Libya to overthrow the Gaddafi regime.

Despite the fact that there are still around 100,000 contractors operating in the quagmire of Iraq, and that their deployment has done nothing but enflame the conflict there, via countless scandals and abuses, the British government is seriously considering repeating the process in Libya. There are also more reports today of yet another NATO strike from the air killing Libyan civilians. The Al-Jamahiriya news agency in Libya reports that a number of civilians, including women and children, as well as several police, were killed in an attack on Kikla, 100 kilometers south of the capital Tripoli.

Last week NATO refused to apologise for killing some 15 civilians during an airstrike, despite acknowledging it was to blame for the deaths. Despite these ongoing aerial bombardments, Britain and France have declared that they are unhappy with the level of NATO activity and have demanded that the bombing be stepped up. Both the British and the French foreign ministers criticized NATO and called for other alliance countries to intensify their military operations.

If this isn’t a full scale war, what exactly is?

From the You Tube channel 91177info

Four detainees were killed and five others wounded. One soldier, seen in the video, comments that the prisoners are only throwing “dirt balls and a few rocks.” He was possibly trying to quell what appeared to be a near free-for-all shooting spree against captive targets. “Be decisive on what you f—— shoot,” he told the others.

According to Press TV, the “US military tried to cover up the bloodshed, saying the riot happened when the prisoners confronted a search for contraband in the prison.” Instead, the ACLU found that the riot was due to the “desecration of the Holy Qur’an by US troops.”

COMMENT ON VIDEO
US troops fire on Iraqi detainees after burning their Holy Quran books in front of them. Amateur footage recently posted on the internet shows American troops firing live ammunition on Iraqi prisoners during a riot in a US detention facility in Iraq back in 2005.

The footage shows US forces using disproportionate force and live rounds against prisoners at the US prison facility Camp Bucca located in Iraq.

The Iraqi detainees were protesting the American troops' desecration of Islam's holy book, the Qur'an.
At the time, the US military tried to cover up the bloodshed, saying the riot happened when the prisoners confronted a search for contraband in the prison.

But the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) later revealed that the real cause of the riot was the desecration of the Holy Qur'an by US troops.

Four prisoners were shot dead and five others wounded during the violence.

In 2008, the US military revealed that it held a total of around 20,000 detainees, some 17,000 of whom at Camp Bucca near Basra in southern Iraq, and more than 3,000 others at Camp Cropper in the capital Baghdad.
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/174186.html

9/11 bin laden war of terror Libya massacre revolution resistance Fighters Zintan Protest Mesrata Benghazi Gaddafi Revolution Bayida Tubruq Al Beida LIBYA Bahrain Army Massacre government Torture Police Abdullah Saudi uprising demonstrators Uprising Karzakan Iran 25Bahman Tehran Egypt Tunisia Khamenei 14Feb Mahmoud Ahmadinejad FBI US Government Wikileaks Tahrir Square Resistance Cairo Hospital Solidarity freedom Muammar Gaddafi: I am still in Libya Kadhafi wmd ليبيا مقاومة الثورة مذبحة المقاتلون Zintan الاحتجاج Mesrata بنغازي القذافي الثورة Bayida طبرق ليبيا البحرين آل غوز الجيش مذبحة الحكومة التعذيب الشرطة المتظاهرين عبد الله السعودي الانتفاضة انتفاضة كرزكان ايران طهران 25Bahman مصر تونس خامنئي 14Feb محمود أحمدي نجاد مكتب التحقيقات الفدرالي الولايات المتحدة حكومة ويكيلياكس المقاومة ميدان التحرير القاهرة مستشفى التضامن حرية معمر القذافي : ما زلت في ليبيا القذافي המהפכה בלוב הטבח ההתנגדות לוחמי Zintan מחאה Mesrata בנגאזי קדאפי המהפכה Bayida Tubruq אל ביידה לוב בחריין הצבא טבח הממשלה עינויים משטרת עבדאללה הסעודי ההתקוממות המפגינים מרד Karzakan איראן 25Bahman טהרן מצרים ותוניסיה חמינאי 14Feb מחמוד אחמדינג 'אד FBI ממשלת ארה"ב Wikileaks תחריר כיכר ההתנגדות בקהיר החולים סולידריות חופש מועמר קדאפי : אני עדיין לוב קדאפי

بوتفليقة تونس إنتفاضة حسني مبارك حرق العراق العرب الإسلام إسرائيل مصر القاهرة مصر الجزائر المغرب تونس الكويت دبي الإمارات قطر السودان البحرين لبنان فلسطين الأردن عمان ليبيا ا سوريا العراق العرب الخبر الأسبوعي الجزيرة العربية كرة القدم العاصمة القاهرة اليوم المغرب العار تونس الساحل الترجي الإفريقي علاء مبارك، محمود ياسين، محمود عبدالعزيز، حسين فهمي، صلاح السعدانى، يسرى، فيفي عبده، إلهام شهين، ميدو، شعبان عبدالرحيم، شريف منير، تامر حسنى، مرتضى منصور، محمد فؤاد، ماجد المصرى ، محمد سعد، محمد عطية, أحمد السقا، يوسف شعبان، محمح صبحي، زينة، إسعاد يونس، إبراهيم حسن, أحمد مكي، حكيم، هيثم شاكر، ،إيهاب توفيق، خالد الغندور،مصطفي عبده، مدحت شلبى، عمرو أديب, أحمد موسى، سمير زاهر أحمد بدير، فتحي عبد الوهاب، أحمد أدم، نهال عنبر، محمد حماقي،تامر البسيوني، إبراهيم حجازي، سعد الصغير، مصطفي البكري، ريهام سعيد و البنانيتين هيفاء وهبي و نانسي عجرم مصر ليبيا دوار اللؤلؤة الرياض جدة حائل نجران رقص كرة قدم معلاية ال سلول النظام الملك محمد السادس Palestine Gaza
الجمعة 18/3 استشهاد شباب معتصمين بأيدي قناصة
koran quran qu'ran pastor jones burning saudi arabia

Un-reserve Dollar? US thinkers up for world order reshape - RT | “Bretton Woods II” convenes to debate the future of the global economy.

“Bretton Woods II” convenes

RT
April 10, 2011

Major financial players from around the world are debating the future of the global economy in the iconic US town of Bretton Woods. The summit held by billionaire philanthropist George Soros is focusing on the place emerging nations will take in the new world order. RT’s Lauren Lister reports from the venue.

---

Soros: Dollar ‘no longer’ reserve currency - During his Bretton Woods II weekend conference, billionaire financier George Soros has issued many bold statements, not the least of which included claiming that the Dollar had already fallen as the world’s reserve currency, and is now reduced to sharing the role.

Aaron Dykes
Infowars.com
April 9, 2011

During his Bretton Woods II weekend conference, billionaire financier George Soros has issued many bold statements, not the least of which included claiming that the Dollar had already fallen as the world’s reserve currency, and is now reduced to sharing the role.

In an interview with Bloomberg, Soros stated:

The big question is whether the U.S. dollar should be the reserve currency; it no longer is, it shares that role with the euro, other currencies, and commodities. But it’s not just gold being used as a substitute, but oil too, which is putting upward pressure on the market.

Soros has convened the Bretton Woods II event in hopes of leading financial reforms and formulating a replacement to the dollar on the world market. He has argued that the original Bretton Woods agreements, which also created the World Bank and International Monetary Fund (IMF), have been outmoded and are in need of new arrangements.

Meanwhile, Soros prescribed more debt for the U.S., urging against calls to shrink the budget. “There is very a strong push to tighten the budget as a way to reduce government spending… In my opinion, the country could actually absorb some more debt in order to get the economy going,” he said.

“If you have a growing economy, you can tolerate a higher level of debt.”

In other matters, Soros estimated that despite the risks of inflation in China, it had emerged as the the ‘big winner’ of the financial crisis. It had been largely immune to the collapse due to its ‘isolation,’ he indicated. Indeed, ‘China was the main beneficiary of globalization,’ Soros said.

Soros also commented on other matters, like the ECB interest rate hike. Further statements are expected to emerge from him and other figures attending the Bretton Woods II conference after it concludes.

 

While the American media discusses the dilemma in the Middle East to a degree, are we really getting the big picture back home? Normon Solomon of the Institute for Public Accuracy says that though the Internet and blogging has allowed a new outlook to be exposed, mainstream media still paints the picture of a paradisaical United States.

Globalists Coming Full Circle - Tony Cartalucci | Long before the verified lies of Qaddafi’s “door-to-door” genocide, Libya was already marked for destabilization and regime change.

Obama executes final leg of Neo-Conservative imperialism

Tony Cartalucci
Infowars.com
April 9, 2011

Paul Wolfowitz (right) in 1991 was apparently pleased with the
outcome of Desert Storm. He believed that the time was ripe
to seize global hegemony before another world power rose to
challenge the Anglo-American establishment.

Long before the verified lies of Qaddafi’s “door-to-door” genocide and even before the media cleverly tagged the engineered destabilization of the Middle East the “Arab Spring,” Libya was already marked for destabilization and regime change. For nearly thirty years the US and UK have funded groups both inside Libya and beyond its borders in various attempts to remove Qaddafi from power. The current administration’s feigned ignorance over the nature of the rebels in Libya is nothing short of absolute deception. The CIA and MI6 are on record for decades following, and in many cases supporting, these very groups.

Below is a partial time line covering Western efforts to implement regime change in Libya.

1980′s: US-CIA backed National Front for the Salvation of Libya (NFSL) made multiple attempts to assassinate Qaddafi and initiate armed rebellion throughout Libya.
1990′s: Noman Benotman and the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) wage a campaign of terror against Qaddafi with Osama Bin Laden’s assistance.

2003: Upon Qaddafi’s abandonment of WMD programs, Libya’s collaboration with MI6 & the CIA to identify and expose the LIFG networks begins, giving Western intelligence a windfall of information regarding the group.
2005: NFSL’s Ibrahim Sahad founds the National Conference of Libyan Opposition (NCLO) in London England.
2011: Early February, the London based NCLO calls for a Libyan “Day of Rage,” beginning the “February 17th revolution.”

2011: Late February, NFSL/NCLO’s Ibrahim Sahad is leading opposition rhetoric, literally in front of the White House in Washington D.C. Calls for no-fly zone in reaction to unsubstantiated accusations Qaddafi is strafing “unarmed protesters” with warplanes.
2011: Late February, Senators Lieberman and McCain and UK PM David Cameron call for providing air cover for Libyan rebels as well as providing them additional arms.

2011: Early March; it is revealed UK SAS special forces are already operating inside Libya
2011: Mid-March; UN adopts no-fly zone over Libya, including air strikes. Immediately, the mission is changed from “protecting civilians” to “ousting Qaddafi.” Egypt violates the arms embargo of UN r.1973 with Washington’s full knowledge by supplying Libyan rebels with weapons, while Al Qaeda’s ties to the rebels are admitted by everyone including the rebels themselves.

Recently, Fareed Zakaria on his CNN show interviewed a former Libyan Al-Qaeda associate, Noman Benotman, to dispel “allegations” that Al Qaeda was playing a key role in the rebellion against Qaddafi. Benotman would concede that Al Qaeda was involved but not significantly, suggesting there were only a few hundred fighters. The Washington Times would later quote Benotman upgrading the number to a thousand. Then after Libyan rebel leader Abdel-Hakim al-Hasidi admitted to recruiting extremists into his ranks and that he believed Al Qaeda members were “good Muslims,” Benotman began back peddling and even claiming, “The way they start to make statements or to understand the conflicts is unbelievable, beyond my imagination. The only explanation I can offer is because they have been affected – whether they like it or not – by the wave of democracy.”

It should be noted that Al-Hasidi, the Libyan rebel commander, received his training in Afghanistan and witnessed the US bombing campaign which began in late 2001. He would fight Americans in Afghanistan and was eventually captured in Pakistan, handed over to the US and later released back to Libya in 2008. Now the same man that fought Americans is being provided American air cover over Benghazi while he leads fellow Al Qaeda fighters, some of which fought Americans in Iraq as well.

For the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, which was founded in the mountains of Afghanistan during the CIA-backed war against the Soviets, then fighting the Americans in both Afghanistan and Iraq, now having the CIA back on the ground in Libya by their side may seem like a reunion of sorts, punctuated by the irony of jets flying overhead that had been hunting them abroad but are now protecting their lives. But to the thousands of US soldiers who have died and the tens of thousands maimed and destroyed supposedly fighting Al Qaeda, to the Americans who have been financially bled to death over the last ten years of war, and to the millions of people in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and now Libya who have been killed, maimed, displaced or otherwise affected by the “War on Terror,” it is more like the punchline of a bad joke.

But the implications go much deeper than merely a conjured army of duped extremists, serving the globalist agenda every step of the way. The implications are deep, and dark indeed.

The Grander Agenda

Ten days after 9/11, General Wesley Clark visited the Pentagon where an officer from the Joint Staff warned him of an impending attack on Iraq. After the Afghan invasion, this officer shared with Clark a document handed down from the Office of the Secretary of Defense indicating plans to attack and destroy the governments of 7 countries; Iraq, Syria, Sudan, Somalia, Iran, Lebanon and Libya. General Wesley Clark would go on to share this story in a 2007 speech given to the Commonwealth Club of California where he repeated this list.

Of course, the campaigns have already begun against each of the nations Clark listed. Iraq was invaded, decimated, and has been occupied by US troops since 2003. In 2006, Israel attempted to invade and dismantle Hezbollah in Lebanon but the conflict ended in a stalemate and an eventual Israeli withdrawal. Somalia was attacked by a proxy Ethiopian invasion force with US air support starting in 2007, but it too eventually ended in failure. A silent war has already begun within Iran, including covert military operations, the arming of terrorists, assassinations, and 2 failed US backed color revolutions. Sudan has been recently carved into two states and Syria is now being intentionally destabilized by US trained and funded activists.

And now, of course in Libya’s case, aerial bombardment by US, UK, and French warplanes has begun, while the CIA and MI6 are on the ground attempting to collapse the Qaddafi regime.

Wesley Clark would backtrack in his 2007 talk in California and recall a conversation he had in 1991 with then Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Paul Wolfowitz regarding Desert Storm. Clark was told that America’s intervention in Iraq proved that the US could use its military force and the Soviets wouldn’t stop them. Wolfowitz said the US had 5-10 years to clean up the old Soviet “client regimes” before the next super power rose up and challenged western hegemony. Clark claimed that this, along with the aftermath of 9/11 constituted a policy coup where Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, and the other members of the of Project for a New American Century had hijacked US foreign policy to destabilize and turn the nations of the Middle East upside down – much the way they are now. The “Neo-Conservative” element of this current round of destabilization goes deeper than the promotion of war, as the “Neo-Cons” have uncharacteristically dedicated themselves to “human rights” and “democracy” side-by-side with the likes of George Soros and Zbigniew Brzezinski.

General Wesley Clark tells of how Middle East destabilization
was planned as far back as 1991, with the destruction of Iraq,
Syria, Lebanon, Sudan, Somalia, Libya, and Iran on the
drawing board following the invasion of Afghanistan.

Bush campaigned on an anti-war, anti-nation building platform. Obama then pledged to roll back the agenda Bush swindled the nation into, only to then continue it in earnest. All along we have been treated to the theatrics of the corporate-owned media, with pundits on the left and right reacting in shock and surprise as these engineered events unfolded according to plan.

Despite Wolfowitz’ agenda being meted out nearly 20 years ago, the ham-fisted nature of both the operation itself in Libya and the propaganda surrounding it suggests a rushed sense of desperation on the globalists’ behalf. Wesley Clark suggested that the operation to destabilize the Middle East and Northern Africa would take 5 years, starting in 2001. Wolfowitz believed that in 1991 the operation would have taken 5-10 years. The failed FBI attack on the World Trade Center in 1993 was most likely the staged impetus to trigger the first blitzkrieg. Not only did the attacks fail to cause the catastrophic effects needed to justify such an operation, the Egyptian informant assisting the FBI had recorded his conversations with agents indicating that they were indeed building a bomb for extremists and providing them with real explosives as well.

1993 would have fit in perfectly to tip off Wolfowitz’ plan. Upon failing, he and his PNAC cadre would attempt to destroy the World Trade Center buildings again, this time successfully on September 11, 2001. The catastrophic loss of life, the confusion, and the rage that was left in its wake gave the PNAC what they called a “new Pearl Harbor” they claimed they needed in their September 2000 report titled “Rebuilding America’s Defenses.”

These men, who in fact helped create Al Qaeda in the mountains of Afghanistan to face the Soviets in the 80s would call on their legion of foreign mercenaries to wreck havoc across the planet, heralding globalist intervention along the way. Certainly this had nothing to do with defending America or spreading “democracy” but rather bolstering the hegemony of the corporate-financier oligarchy that both the PNAC cadre and the bankers who thoroughly saturate Obama’s administration constitute.

What appears to have happened is a costly delay in 1993 and a post-9/11 campaign that has dragged on 5 years longer than expected. With the same clumsy hands fumbling in Libya also trying to stab simultaneously at both Moscow and Beijing with their agenda laid on the table openly for all to see, failure on the globalists’ behalf now may incur a wrathful response from a planet about to truly awaken.

It should be expected that that any excuse to complete regime change in Libya will be made, including creating the conditions necessary to put troops on the ground – be it because of a failing rebellion, a false flag attack carried out in Qaddafi’s name, or even feigned fears the globalists’ own Al Qaeda might “seize” Libya should they not intervene. Similarly, with the US openly admitting to funding subversive activities across the Arab world, in Iran, and even as far as China, the globalists have painted themselves into an irredeemable, inescapable corner of confrontation.

Look past the feckless puppets occupying our public offices and toward the corporations and financial empires that are our true “misleaders.” Boycott these corporations and systematically replace them by getting self-sufficient as an individual, as a household, and as a community. Independence is freedom, freedom is independence and the dominion of this dark empire can be broken by understanding that they need us, we do not need them.

For ways to battle the globalists by achieving self-sufficiency and freedom through independence please read on:

Self-Sufficiency
Alternative Economics
The Lost Key to Real Revolution
Boycott the Globalists
Naming Names: Your Real Government

---

 

The War rages On the home front in the US to Iraq, Libya

Libya: Nato airstrike ‘kills rebels in Brega’

London Telegraph
April 7, 2011

A Nato airstrike on a military tank near the eastern oil town of Brega killed two Libyan rebels and wounded 10, according to witnesses.

Full article here

Nato air strike ‘kills Libyan rebels’

London Guardian
April 7, 2011

Rebels in eastern Libya say a Nato air strike has hit their forces near the oil town of Brega. At least 13 rebel fighters were killed, according to one report.

Full article here

Libya: UK Staged Deadly Airstrike On Oil Field
Sky News
April 7, 2011

The Libyan government has accused Britain of killing at least three people in an airstrike at an oil field in the southeast of the country.

Full article here

Press TV
April 7, 2011

Al-Qaeda in Yemen has not been held responsible for the death of even one American for the past five years, yet the US continues to play the al-Qaeda card and provide the country’s regime with military aid.

In an interview with Press TV, Ali al-Ahmed, director of Intitute (Persian) Gulf Affairs (IGA) in Washington, shares his views on US military aid to Yemen, the exaggerated al-Qaeda connection, and optimal outcomes. The following is a transcript of the interview.

Press TV: What is your reaction toward the Pentagon state secretary saying there is no decision yet in stopping military aid to Yemen and of the US assertion that US weapons are not being used against demonstrators?

They have been used; it is not honest to say that they have not. We know that (there are) special units the US and CIA have been training; perhaps they have not directly taken part in the shooting and killing of demonstrators personally. However, they have displaced other forces, meaning that they freed other forces to do that. There is a direct link between US aid to Yemen and the killings of hundreds of demonstrators.

Press TV: Yemen is a very divided society as you and other analysts have mentioned previously; however, a lot of Yemenis have united for this revolution. Was the US essentially pressed in a corner — not having a choice, but to continue to provide military aid to Yemen?

No I don’t believe that. Saleh is sustaining al-Qaeda to use it as a bargaining chip with Saudi Arabia and the US. Once Saleh is outside of the palace, al-Qaeda’s threats will diminish greatly and the US knows this very well; however, they have not called on Abdullah Saleh to resign until recently, for which they want a transfer of power.

Focusing on supporting the people is going to be the best way for the US to diminish the threat of al-Qaeda – supporting these demonstrators. And instead of sending weapons they should send humanitarian aid. They should allow the people to govern their own country in reflection of what the people want, which is not dictatorship. That is the best tool to fight terrorism.

Press TV: What about US negotiations with the opposition?- There is a story that Riyadh may be getting involved in hosting negotiations of some sort. Do you see potential for success through these negotiations? Or is it simply too late for Saleh?

I think it is too late for Saleh to be part of any future plans for Yemen. I am worried and wary of any Saudi role in Yemen because so far, history has proven that Saudi Arabia’s role in Yemen has been a negative one. They have supported violence and bombed the country as everybody knows. So they are not a neutral player here. I think other countries, like Egypt, Syria — or Qatar even — would be a better choice.

It is a question that I’ve always asked – the US has been able to bring in coalitions to wage wars and they have not worked to building any coalition to mediate peace between Arab countries with Arab and Muslim majority populations. And that is disturbing.

The US could get a lot accomplished in terms of winning hearts and minds by becoming the peacemaker in Yemen and the other countries in the region. Instead of sending weapons, they could be sending in a delegation with authority, who would mediate between the enemies in the role of a broker just like they did when they mediated the treaty between Egypt and Israel, which was led by Jimmy Carter. Why not mediate between the enemies so that we can have a government that is responsible for the wishes of its people (and) not to the whim of a dictator and his family?

Press TV: Why are the US and a coalition involved now in Libya, but not in Yemen? All this talk about the al-Qaeda bogeyman in Yemen; certainly the al-Qaeda factor is considered highly important to the US, isn’t it?

Well, there is a threat of al-Qaeda in Yemen, but I think it has been exaggerated tremendously and so far, al-Qaeda in Yemen has not been able to kill a single American in the past five years so we are not really talking about something that is of catastrophic importance.

In Yemen we don’t need to have war. What you need is to apply political pressure on Yemeni parties to come and speak to each other to collaborate in building a government that is modern and responsible to its citizens. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to do that and it would definitely be cheaper than dropping bombs on people like what happened last year in Yemen or what is happening now in Libya.

So there is a cheaper alternative with a much more positive outcome for the US. Rather than flying military jets, the US could be flying in peace envoys to bring the parties together and Yemenis would be shy and embarrassed by the fact that there is an American trying to get them to talk to each other to make peace for them. This is a far better position for the US.

Press TV: You speak of peace envoys being a better choice for the US in Yemen…

It revolves around a Saudi connection. John Brennan in the White House is the American architect of US foreign policy in Yemen and was the former CIA chief in Saudi Arabia so he is influenced by the desires of the Saudi monarchy. He is why we see the Yemen situation getting worse; an American official designing US policy heavily tied to Saudi wishes. His policy is solely been to support Abdullah Saleh and that’s all – he should be removed.

The solution is to talk to every party and they are not weak. In fact, Saleh is one of the weaker players. US policy right now is a failure.

RT
April 6, 2011

UN and French troops bombarded targets around the residence of Laurent Gbagbo in the city of Abidjan. The UN says its raids were carried out to protect civilians. Forces loyal to the internationally recognised winner of the presidential poll Alassane Ouattara have since claimed to have captured the palace. He’d been refusing to cede power ever since losing last November’s election. Hundreds have been killed during a week of fighting in the country. Moe Seager from the Americans Against the War group says by intervening in Ivory Coast, the UN and France were actually pursuing a double goal.

K Street’s favorite dictators

Popular revolutions swept away autocratic leaders in Tunisia and Egypt. The US and NATO launched airstrikes in Libya under a “responsibility to protect” civilians. But for decades the same dictators clung to power with US support.

RT
April 6, 2011

Popular revolutions swept away autocratic leaders in Tunisia and Egypt. The US and NATO launched airstrikes in Libya under a “responsibility to protect” civilians. But for decades the same dictators clung to power with US support. Despite the rhetoric about human rights from the State Department and the White House, a few blocks away on DC’s K Street, many equally repressive regimes are lauded as partners and allies thanks to big bucks paid to powerful lobbying firms. But perhaps the best Cinderella tale on K Street is that of oil-rich Equatorial Guinea, whose autocrat Teodoro Obiang recently dropped $1,000,000 to hire Clinton family friend Lanny Davis—and went from denounced dictator to a photo with President Obama himself.

Webster G. Tarpley, Ph.D.
TARPLEY.net
April 4, 2011

After two weeks of imperialist attack, Libya is being mangled by al Qaeda terrorists, civil war, NATO air raids, cruise missiles, Predator drones, and C-130 gunships – all made possible by the CIA-backed al Qaeda rebels of Cyrenaica. US, British, French, and Dutch commandos have taken leadership of the rebel forces, and are arming them with modern weapons in flagrant violation of the arms embargo specified in UN Security Council resolution 1973. Al Qaeda is also stealing heavy weapons on its own, as the president of Chad has reported. The singing tomorrows of the fatuous US-UK color revolution rhetoric have dissolved, exposing the hideous reality of a brutal, cynical, imperialist drive to destroy the modern nation-state itself.

Rebel Triumvirate of Terror Rules Darna

According to the London Daily Telegraph of March 26, Darna (also transliterated as Derna or Darnah), a key city in the rebel heartland between Benghazi in Tobruk, is commanded by al-Hasidi, an al Qaeda terrorist controller who trained and hobnobbed with Osama bin Laden at the Khost terrorist training camp in Afghanistan. Hasidi boasts of having sent 25 fighters to fight US and NATO forces in Afghanistan; one wonders how many they managed to kill. Hasidi was a US prisoner of war after being captured by the Pakistanis, but tells the Wall Street Journal of April 2 that he now hates the US only “less than 50%” hinting that Americans can redeem themselves by appeasing Al Qaeda with arms, money, political power, and diplomatic support. At his side in the city leadership is Sufian bin Kumu, Osama bin Laden’s chauffeur, another terrorist who was an inmate at Guantánamo Bay for six years. Also among the Darna city fathers is al-Barrani, a devoted member of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, which merged with Al Qaeda in 2007.

This gaggle of fanatics, psychotics, and criminals is billed by the CIA media as an effective ruling elite for the future democratic governance of Libya. In reality, the Benghazi rebel council, heavily larded with al Qaeda terrorists, could only preside over the descent of the country into a chaos of tribalism, warlords, and criminal syndicates which would spell the end of civilization itself in the area. Precisely this appears to be the goal of US policy, and not just in Libya.

Darna, Northeast Libya: the World Capital of Terrorist Recruitment

Nor are these persons atypical. A December 2007 study by the US Military Academy at West Point showed that Libya (population 7 million) provided 20% of all Al Qaeda fighters crossing the Syrian border into Iraq at that time. This same city of Darna (population about 60,000) was the single greatest center of terrorist recruitment anywhere in the world, edging out Riyadh, Saudi Arabia (population 4.5 million); the rebel capital of Benghazi also placed in the top four. Libya sent twice as many terrorists into Iraq per capita as did Saudi Arabia, and 85% of the Libyans who indicated a specialty chose that of suicide bomber.

The London Economist, BBC Newsnight, and an increasing number of pro-Obama warmonger quackademics are attempting to obscure these plain facts. These are now mellow, pluralist, democratic terrorists, they argue. The CIA limited hangout operation known as Wikileaks has helpfully provided a few doctored cables purporting to show that it was really US support of Qaddafi that drove these fanatics into despair and terrorism — which is also part of the CIA line. On April 1, the Benghazi rebels themselves used the media presence at Friday prayers to hold up signs denying that the rebellion is run by Al Qaeda. If so, let them oust the terror triumvirate of Darna, and reveal the names of the dozen or more anonymous members of the rebel council who are suspected of belonging to Al Qaeda.

Hillary Clinton concedes she has no “100% insight” into the rebels, and US Admiral Stavridis, the NATO commander, has told the Senate Armed Services Committee that he sees only “flickers” of Al Qaeda. In truth, the central role of Al Qaeda is no flicker, but is as bright as the noonday sun over the Mediterranean.

Four Plagues of Libya

The Libyan insurrection has four components. The first is provided by the British, and consists of the monarchist and racist Harabi and Obeidat tribes of the Benghazi-Darna-Tobruk corridor, whose traditional culture is that of the obscurantist Senussi Order. During the resistance to Italian colonialism, these tribes allied with the British and were rewarded by seeing the head of the Senussi Order placed on the throne in the person of King Idris I, overthrown by Qaddafi in 1968. Deprived of their role as the monarchist ruling class, these tribes hate the black or dark-skinned pro-Qaddafi Fezzan tribes of southwest Libya, and this has fed into the lynching and massacre of many black Africans from Chad, Mali, and Sudan working in Libya, which the western media have ignored. Enan Obeidi, the woman who claims she was raped by Qaddafi forces, is an Obeidat from Benghazi, and this puts her story into question. For the media, she is a new edition of the Kuwait incubator babies hoax of 1990, made to order to whip up war hysteria against Qaddafi.

Two ingredients come from the CIA. These are Al Qaeda itself, founded as the CIA’s own Arab Legion against the USSR by then CIA deputy director Robert Gates – the current Defense Secretary– in Afghanistan in 1981-82. Another CIA ingredient is the Libyan National Salvation Front, based first in Sudan and then in Northern Virginia, which is supposedly sending the CIA asset Khalifa Hifter to lead the rebel military, most likely also to cover the presence of the Al Qaeda types.

A fourth component is contributed by the French, who arranged the defection of top Qaddafi associate Nouri Mesmari last fall, as reported by Maghreb Confidential. A clique of generals around Mesmari helped foment the military mutinies against Qaddafi in northeast Libya.

And Libya is not unique. In Yemen, al Qaeda operatives are decisive components of the CIA putsch attempt against President Saleh, which US is promoting in order to fragment Yemen into two or more rump states. Here the Al Qaeda leader is al-Shihri, a Saudi who was freed along with several other Guantánamo inmates and sent to Yemen by the Bush administration, allegedly as a humanitarian gesture, but in reality to provide leadership for the coming destabilization. Also in Yemen is the American-born Anwar Awlaki, known in the trade as Awlaki the CIA lackey, an obvious US double agent who has been used to give the Al Qaeda seal of approval to dozens of terrorists including the Fort Dix six, Major Hasan of Fort Hood, and Mutallab of Nigeria, the Christmas 2009 underwear bomber.

In Syria, the CIA goal is to deprive Iran of an ally, to isolate Hezbollah, to oust Russia from the Tartus naval station, and to build the power of the Muslim Brotherhood, which is the principal force promoting the insurrection so far.

Demand that the State Department Explain Why the US is Arming al Qaeda Terrorists

Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan has rightly warned against the NATO policy of arming the Libyan rebels, since this would be “conducive to terrorism.” Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov has also condemned any NATO arming of the rebels. Pope Benedict XVI’s call for a cease-fire goes in the same direction. Russia, Turkey, China, and other governments must now formally demand explanations from the State Department as to why the US is providing the most dangerous international terrorists with modern weapons and training, while proposing to award them large chunks of the $32 billion of frozen Libyan government assets, plus a share in coming oil revenues. This is enough to make the Mediterranean, the Arab world, and southern Europe boil over with refugees, piracy, mayhem, and war.

Under Bush and Cheney, the alleged presence of Al Qaeda was used as a pretext for bombings and invasions. Under Obama, an overstretched and moribund US-UK imperialism is using al Qaeda as its own irregular infantry in the effort to harass and cripple the nation-states of the world, causing them to disintegrate into a tribal, sectarian, criminal, and warlord chaos. In the current phase, al Qaeda has resumed its original status as CIA guerrillas. As a result, civilization itself is threatened across vast areas of the globe. If you are skeptical, just take a look at the city council of Darna, Libya.
READ MORE

Libya chaos ‘allows al-Qaida to grab surface-to-air missiles’

Al-Qaida is exploiting the conflict in Libya to acquire weapons, including surface-to-air missiles, and smuggle them to a stronghold in northern Mali, a security official from neighboring Algeria told Reuters.

Reuters
April 4, 2011

Al-Qaida is exploiting the conflict in Libya to acquire weapons, including surface-to-air missiles, and smuggle them to a stronghold in northern Mali, a security official from neighbouring Algeria told Reuters.

The official said a convoy of eight Toyota pick-up trucks left eastern Libya, crossed into Chad and then Niger, and from there into northern Mali where in the past few days it delivered a cargo of weapons.

He said the weapons included Russian-made RPG-7 anti-tank rocket-propelled grenades, Kalashnikov heavy machine guns, Kalashnikov rifles, explosives and ammunition.

He also said he had information that al-Qaida’s north African wing, known as al-Qaida in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM), had acquired from Libya Russian-made, shoulder-fired, Strela surface-to-air missiles known by the Nato designation Sam-7.

Full article here

---

Lindsey Graham Advocates Killing First Amendment

Oil Rises On Market Speculation Over Globalist War in Libya

WS Journal | Two former Afghan Mujahedeen and a six-year detainee at Guantanamo Bay have stepped to the fore of this city’s military campaign.

Criminals and murderers and the people who pay the price for war.

US And Egyptian Special Forces May Be Covertly Training Libyan Rebels - U.S. and Egyptian special forces are training Libyan rebel fighters in the use of advanced weapons, according to a report from Al Jazeera.

‘War for Libyan oil planned long ago, no one cares about people’ -Susan Lindauer, a journalist and author specializing on American interventions, has never believed the allied forces intervened in Libya out of humanitarian reasons. It is a war for oil which was prepared long ago, Lindauer argues – anyone who cared about the Libyan people would stop immediately.

Ex-Mujahedeen Help Lead Libyan Rebels  - DARNA, Libya—Two former Afghan Mujahedeen and a six-year detainee at Guantanamo Bay have stepped to the fore of this city’s military campaign, training new recruits for the front and to protect the city from infiltrators loyal to Col. Moammar Gadhafi.

Exposed: The US-Saudi Libya deal - You invade Bahrain. We take out Muammar Gaddafi in Libya. This, in short, is the essence of a deal struck between the Barack Obama administration and the House of Saud.

“Protecting” Civilians And Aiding Rebels By Killing Them: 13 Dead From NATO Airstrike -NATO voiced concern on Saturday about reports of civilian deaths in a coalition air strike near Brega as rebels claimed victory in the battle for the key Libyan oil town.

Exposed: The US-Saudi Libya deal
You invade Bahrain. We take out Muammar Gaddafi in Libya. This, in short, is the essence of a deal struck between the Barack Obama administration and the House of Saud.

Al Qaeda is The Trojan Horse In The War on Terror
Nearly every war in the 20th century was the product of false beliefs, human error, government-media deception, and popular myths. Objective truth and human reason were replaced with systematic propaganda and government dogma.

Patrick Henningsen
Infowars.com
April 1, 2011

It was only a matter of time before gungho western audiences and pundits would have to face the harsh reality that overwhelming military power produces: 1,400 air sorties and 700 Tomahawk cruise missiles later, the civilian body bags are beginning to mount up. And the political ramifications for the acting war parties in Washington, Britain and Paris are inescapable.



Dead Libyans: Not ready for corporate media primetime.

According to yesterday’s report from Reuters, at least 40 civilians were killed in air strikes by Western forces on Tripoli, a top Vatican official in the Libyan capital told a Catholic news agency on Thursday, quoting witnesses. “The so-called humanitarian raids have killed dozens of civilian victims in some neighborhoods of Tripoli,” said Giovanni Innocenzo Martinelli, the Apostolic Vicar of Tripoli. Martinelli goes on to add, “I have collected several witness accounts from reliable people. In particular, in the Buslim neighborhood, due to the bombardments, a civilian building collapsed, causing the death of 40 people”.

NATO has said it will investigate reports that up to 40 civilians were killed in the Coalition bombing strike near Tripoli, a Press TV correspondent reported. In addition, medical sources said at least seven more civilians were slain in Wednesday’s raid on the village of Zawia el Argobe, 15 km (9 miles) from Brega. The airstrike also wounded more than 25 civilians and destroyed several nearby homes.

The Libyan government on Thursday night claimed close to 100 civilians had died in air strikes since Allied hostilities began last weekend.

The final bill in human lives cannot really be tallied until a much later date. There is little doubt though, that given the current frequency of Allied bombs and missiles and what we have learned from the West’s fabled “surgical strike” operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, that the final number of confirmed civilian body bags will certainly exceed 1,000 within a week or two.

COALITION USING DEPLETED URANIUM

Only a few days into the US-led attacks on Libya, there have already been reports of forty-five 2,000 pound bombs containing depleted uranium (DU) being dropped down on Libya by the U.S. B-2s during the first 24 hours of the attack, say Stop the War Coalition.

Additionally, American journalist Dave Lindorff reports, ”The British-built Harrier jets used by British naval air forces and also by U.S. Marine pilots, are often equipped with pod-mounted cannons that fire 20 mm shells–shells that often have uranium projectiles designed to penetrate heavy armor”.

The use of DU has been a major feature in US-led Coalition and Israeli war efforts since 2001, even though it has been banned through an international treaty signed by all UN security council member states at the Geneva Convention. The damage it does is well documented, long-lasting and horrific to say the least. Deaths could be calculated over many years, as radioactive dust continues to blow throughout the region. Its use is classed as a war crime under international law, so when will the US, Britain and Israel be called to explain these actions in the dock?

Neocons and Democrats Work in Congress to Support Obama’s Libyan War
Kurt Nimmo | McCain, Kerry, and Lieberman team up to put a gloss of legality on Obama’s unconstitutional war. As the mad bombers at NATO engage in a public relations stunt in response to the fallout from the slaughter of innocent Libyan civilians, here in the United States a few dignified members of Congress are attempting to put a halt to the illegal war

Libya is a Continuation of Neocon War to Remake Middle East - Ron Paul | The American people have once again been suckered into an unconstitutional and undeclared war.

US says it is still considering arming Gaddafi opposition

Steve Watson
Prisonplanet.com
March 29, 2011

A top ranking NATO Commander has admitted that intelligence has uncovered elements of “al qaeda” amongst Libyan rebel fighters currently receiving tactical military support from US and European led operations inside the country.

The admission serves as yet more confirmation that radical Islamic fundamentalists are part of the opposition groups attempting to oust the nationalist dictatorship of Muammar Gaddafi, with the help of the US and its NATO allies.

“We are examining very closely the content, composition, the personalities, who are the leaders of these opposition forces,” Admiral James Stavridis, NATO’s Supreme Allied Commander, Europe, and also the commander of U.S. European Command, said during testimony at the U.S. Senate.

“…we have seen flickers in the intelligence of potential al Qaeda, Hezbollah, we’ve seen different things.” Stavridis said, while adding that the rebels leadership appeared to be comprised also of “responsible men and women”.

NATO shouldn’t need to look far for such intelligence, however, given that last week the supreme commander of anti Gaddafi rebels forces in Libya acknowledged that among the ranks of those fighting against the government are islamic militants who have fought and killed US troops in Iraq.

Abdel-Hakim al-Hasidi, who made the remarks in an interview with Il Sole 24 Ore, an Italian newspaper, also admitted that he had previously recruited fundamentalists to fight in Iraq, and said that the fighters are “today are on the front lines in Adjabiya”.

Those fighters violently oppose the secular regime of Gaddafi and wish to see it destroyed and replaced with sharia law in Libya.

Despite these facts and admissions, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice says the Obama administration has still not ruled out military support for the Libyan rebels.