A Pep Rally for Libya?

Waiting For The Left

The Left is waiting (for Goddess only knows what), leaderless and immobilized, bombarded 24/7 by corporate and so-called alternative media demonizing the Libyan crazy man while anxiously supporting the brave, “untrained” rebels who fearlessly confront Muammar Gaddafi’s superior forces. NPR, Democracy Now, and the BBC are embedded with those courageous “revolutionaries.” Lourdes Garcia-Navarro (NPR), Pascale Harter (BBC), and Anjali Kamat (DN) report with palpable sisterly compassion every moment of exhilaration or frustration the lads experience. The BBC drops a few seconds of incomprehensible words from the Mad Man’s Master Plan (The Green Book) while ignoring Gaddafi’s insistence that over two weeks ago, he invited the UN to send in an investigation team, as well as news reporters, to see what was actually going on.

What is actually going on? Peter Bouckaert, the Emergencies Director at Human Rights Watch in Benghazi tells Democracy Now correspondent, Anjali Kamat1 that reporters from all the major corporate and alternative media — people you would expect to know better — are doing a very sloppy and unprofessional job of coverage in general. Most of what passes for journalism, he says, is “irresponsible reporting and just lazy reporting. You know, rather than going out and investigating these incidents and whether they’re true, these rumors, Western journalists from very reputable publications just published the rumors as true. And they talked about African men running wild, raping women and all of these things, which is just about as racist a myth as you can get.”

The Democracy Now correspondent appears unmoved by Bouckaert’s accusations. But she is curious about the rumors that Gaddafi has recruited African men thought to be committing crimes. Her immediate response to the Human Rights Watch complaint is: “Can you say a little bit about who the mercenaries actually are?”

Bouckaert patiently explains that Gaddafi “does have the capacity — not to go recruit African mercenaries, but to use the groups that he’s already training and financing. And it’s possible that some of those fighters have been mobilized around Tripoli or even in the east. But before we jump to that conclusion, we should investigate. And for the moment, all of the cases we have investigated in the east, these allegations have turned out not to be true.” (emphasis added)

There have been reports of American, French, and British “mercenaries” arriving in Libya three weeks ago. Some of the young “rebels” interviewed speak American English without a trace of foreign or Arabic accent. On-line photos show a variety in skin color from white to black, as well as a wide range in physiognomy. All appear healthy, energetic, and well armed. NPR’s Lourdes Garcia-Navarro assures us they are not lacking in arms and munition. The “rebels” are reportedly carrying everything from smart new anti-aircraft and anti-tank guns, rocket-propelled grenade launchers, surface-to-air missals, and machine guns. News photos of “rebels” mounting armored tanks with cannon, and missle launchers mounted on large trucks are impressive. However, the NPR reporter complains the “trigger-happy” youth can be heard shooting off their fire arms all night long; but she understands they have little experience and need the practice. Neither she nor the BBC, NPR, or Democracy Now reporters ask where the rebels come from, or the origin of their handsome camouflage uniforms, rugged all-weather apparel and heavy military weapons. Surely no outside influence or mercenaries among this good-spirited, heroic bunch.

Professor Sam Hamod notes that accounts and photos of Africans being lynched in Libya have not provided identification of the victims: “We don’t know who they are, but we do know there are African Union members sending troops to help Qaddafi against the American backed ‘rebels.’ But remember this, Libyans are black, blue black, dark brown, brown, dark tan, tan and white — the Africans who are helping Qaddafi are black and the ones fighting Qaddafi are mostly white — so if there is any lynching going on, it is more likely the white Libyan ‘rebels’ doing the alleged lynching.”2

Glen Ford of Black Agenda Report also commented that a “racist pogrom is raging against the 1.5 million sub-Saharan Black African migrant workers who do the hard jobs in Libya, work that is rejected by the relatively prosperous Libyans.3 Hundreds of Black migrant workers have already been killed by anti-Gaddafi forces – yet the U.S. corporate media express absolutely no concern for their safety. One western report noted that large numbers of Black Africans were seized in Benghazi, and were assumed to have been hanged. That is a war crime, whether these men were soldiers or migrant workers, but the western correspondent seemed unconcerned. One suspects there are many atrocities occurring in the rebel-held areas of Libya, especially against people that are not members of the locally dominant tribe. Benghazi is not Tahrir Square, in Cairo.”

Reliable confirmation of any of these accusations is officially unavailable because, as Human Rights Watch observed, reporting by all members of the media has been “irresponsible,” “lazy,” and not based on actual investigation. They should have added “racist.” Democracy Now‘s Anjali Kamat says these crimes against Black Africans are the result of “populist rage,” and assures us that the rebellious members of the “popular uprising” have promised to stem the tide of racism.

It is estimated that there were between 1.5 million to 2 million foreign workers in Libya, employed in all types of positions from technical experts and laborers in oil related activities, to service and domestic workers. Apparently none of them had felt any need to flee Libya before the revolt began on February 17. Who and what caused hundreds of thousands to run for the borders attempting to escape Libya with what ever possessions they could carry? Reflecting on this question, Diana Johnstone doubts that the refugees fled persecution from Gaddafi, the man who encouraged them to come to Libya to fill essential jobs and develop Libya’s infrastructure. “Rather,” she states, “it is fairly clear that some of the ‘democratic’ rebels have attacked the foreign workers out of pure xenophobia. Qaddafi’s openness to Africans in particular is resented by a certain number of Arabs.”4 Nevertheless, that these workers are fleeing Gaddafi seems to be the unquestioned assumption of the Western press.

Repeated statements that Gaddafi is murdering his own people are backed up by telephone calls from one Libyan family member to another who then passes the information onto American and British reporters, who in turn broadcast the phone call to listeners literally all day long. (It’s a habit I picked up from my grandmother: I have the FM stations on the entire day as I work around my home or drive here and there.) Early on, I kept waiting for a report or investigation and body count, or description of the injured by an official on-site witness. Nothing, just the repetitive taped phone call: “I talked to my cousin who lives in that town, and he says…” Are these casualties from the well-armed opposition forces engaged in battle with the government military? Are they civilians? A house was bombed. News of the bombing of that house was repeated every half-hour on NPR. There was a brief report some days ago that the heavily armed rebels had burned down government buildings. As others have pointed out, we are not talking about government soldiers firing on “peaceful protesters.”

Even though he is certain Gaddafi is “a guy who has already shown a willingness to kill civilian protesters that are his own countrymen,” CNBC senior editor, John Carney, is not in favor of bombing Libya and setting up the no-fly zone.5 No photos and no investigative reporters’ first-hand account of those dead Libyan civilians were provided to back up Carney’s certainty. Opposition reports that on February 22, Gaddafi had bombed civilians in Benghazi, were again not investigated or verified. However, other sources, including Russia Today (RT), reported that the US and NATO were aware of Russian satellite images showing no air strikes in Libya that day.6

The BBC insists it is impossible to know what is going on in areas where there are large populations of Gaddafi supporters. Foreign reporters, they say, can’t get into Tripoli for example. (After weeks of audibly snickering at Libyan government officials interviewed, and reporting that Gaddafi and his troops were committing crimes against humanity — and that anyone cooperating with him would be subject to the same international legal procedures reserved for war criminals — three British reporters apparently were taken to Tripoli against their will, but not treated to the usual Libyan hospitality.7 However, non-Western reporters have been reporting from Tripoli, and several current video interviews with families and groups of people of all ages, good-naturedly talking with reporters can be seen on RT. Boys and girls, men and women cheerfully express their support for Gaddafi and invite “foreign reporters” (including Al Jazeera; or, especially Al Jazeera) to come to Tripoli to see what is actually going on. “Does this look like a war-torn area to you?” a young man asks as he gestures toward a crowed avenue of casual pedestrians, shoppers, children at play, and families on park benches. In their news reports from Libya, RT includes recent interviews with Americans seldom heard from in US corporate media, like Danny Schechter, American film maker (known as “The News Dissector” of Cambridge in the 60′s), and Sara Flounders, Co-director of International Action Center.8

It is not only the Western news media that seem to have lost any sense of objectivity as they romanticize the opposition’s attempts to topple Gaddafi and claim Libya as their own. In my neck of the woods, there is a loud silence on Left side of this issue. The usually quite outspoken and easily mobilized human rights and anti-war activists are strangely mute. One hears no public criticism of the exaggeratedly biased corporate and “alternative” media coverage. No recognition that here we go again on a “humanitarian” war of liberation to save a foreign nation from another Hitler-like, Saddam-incarnate, diabolic ruler. When pushed for a private opinion some will assert, sotto voce, that they would not like to see US military intervention in Libya, of course. But then, with heightened intensity and a sharper tone, they quickly confirm their hatred for that murderous devil Gaddafi, and pray that a younger generation will oust him from power. Others, with perhaps less emotional involvement in Middle East politics, ponder how one mounts a protest against US “humanitarian intervention” that won’t be misunderstood as support for Gaddafi.

You cannot have it both ways. Vilifying Gaddafi as a homicidal, suicidal criminal cannibalizing his own kin, while at the same time opposing US military intervention, may not make sense to those “masses” the American Left hopes to eventually enlist in a “mass movement.”Along these lines, author and teacher Jean Bricmont points out: “It is difficult for ordinary citizens to know exactly what is going on in Libya because Western media have thoroughly discredited themselves in Iraq, Afghanistan, Lebanon and Palestine, and alternative sources are not always reliable either. That of course does not prevent the pro-war left from being absolutely convinced of the truth of the worst reports about Gaddafi, just as they were twelve years ago about Milosevic.”

Bricmont also criticizes the “radical” Left, which he says “often manages both to denounce Western governments in every possible way and to demand that those same governments intervene militarily around the globe to defend democracy. Their lack of political reflection makes them highly vulnerable to disinformation campaigns and to becoming passive cheerleaders of US-NATO wars.9

The ability of another leftist political author, Diana Johnstone, to take the pulse of European Left and also diagnose them “cheerleaders for war” leaves me breathless. As does the thought of a US-led bombing of Libya. In this regard, we do not have to look to the Left for pro-war pep rallies. I nominate the BBC’s Pascale Harter, head cheerleader. On March 9, she told the listening audience that the importance of establishing a no-fly zone would basically be “symbolic” to “help boost the morale” of the self-appointed National Council of rebels who intend to govern Libya. There is something new about the way deeply affectionate tones are used to embrace biased reporting in support of war these days. Whatever the reason, Harter seems blind to the real consequences of bombing raids she passionately promotes. Not so Defense Secretary Robert Gates, who has laid it out in spades: “Let’s just call a spade a spade,” Mr. Gates told Congress. “A no-fly zone begins with an attack on Libya to destroy the air defenses. That’s the way you do a no-fly zone. And then you can fly planes around the country and not worry about our guys being shot down. But that’s the way it starts.”10

Speaking to a House Committee, Defense Secretary Gates stressed that “creating a no-fly zone would have to begin with an attack on Libya.”11 During an interview with the BBC,12 Stephen Zunes, Professor of Politics and International Studies at the University of San Francisco, set out the implications of a no-fly zone in more detail. He explained that due to the US bombing raids on Libyan cities in the 1980′s, Gaddafi has built extensive anti-aircraft installations everywhere, especially near crowded urban areas. Consequently, Zunes’ analysis is that it would take a great deal of bombing to destroy these defensive installations, with a high probability there would be large numbers of civilian causalities. Zunes points out that the recent self-appointed Council of rebels does not represent the whole of the opposition, nor the whole of Libyan society, and certainly not the large number of Gaddafi supporters and government armed forces. “Right now it is a civil war.” He says it would have to get a lot worse before he could accept justification for “humanitarian intervention” in the form of bombing Libya and imposing a no-fly zone. Although Zunes is explicit about his support for anti-Gaddafi forces, he reminds the idealistic BBC reporter that “supporting an armed faction usually doesn’t result in a democratic government” and that “martial law is not a good way to bring about representative government.”

And the Winner is…?!

“Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak has told the Wall Street Journal that Israel may soon seek an additional $20 billion in military aid from the United States in light of the uprisings in the Middle East and North Africa. Barak told the paper, ‘It might be wise to invest another $20 billion to upgrade the security of Israel for the next generation or so. A strong, responsible Israel can become a stabilizer in such a turbulent region.’ Israel already receives $3 billion in military aid a year from the United States.13 But the big door prize and the oil bucks, as we all know, go to the US and its closest Western allies; while the big losers will inevitably be the majority of Libya’s six million people. Their story is yet to be told. They are not among the handful of individuals interviewed by the Western media, and not among the glorious rebels embraced by that same media.

It is very difficult to stand up against the cheer-leading media marathon that has gone on for the past several weeks. Most of what is left of the American left appear to be cautious liberals, who nevertheless do speak up and stand out for the causes they believe in. Many came out as boisterous and visible opponents of Greedy Capitalists destroying public unions in Wisconsin, but have not organized anti-Imperialist rallies against the destruction of Libya thus far… to be continued.

  1. 3/7/11 []
  2. “African Union, Destroy It: The Secret Agenda of America and the EU,” 3/7/11. []
  3. 3/2/11. []
  4. “Libya: Is This Kosovo All Over Again?” 3/7/11. []
  5. CNBC.com, 3/7/11. []
  6. Alexandra Valiente, Ephemeris 360.org.news, 2/25/11. []
  7. “Gadhafi Troops Detain, Beat BBC News Team,” UPI.com, 3/10/11. []
  8. RT News Videos: Tripoli Under Fire In Media Information War; Money As a Weapon In West’s War on Libya; 3/8/11. []
  9. “Libya and The Return of Humanitarian Imperialism,” Counterpunch, 3/8/11. []
  10. NYT 3/4/11. []
  11. CNN 3/2/11. []
  12. 3/9/11 []
  13. Democracy Now “Headlines” 3/8/11. []

Mary Lynn Cramer, MA, MSW, LICSW, low-income senior enrolled in an MA HMO, has a background in History of Economic Thought, and Clinical Social Work. She can be reached at: mllynn2@yahoo.com. Read other articles by Mary Lynn.

19 comments on this article so far ...

Comments RSS feed

  1. MichaelKenny said on March 12th, 2011 at 8:57am #

    The “problem” with Libya is that the complexity of the situation does not fit into the simplistic “pro-American” v “anti-American” worldview of the American left. Gadaffi himself has been stamped with both labels at various times. In the simplistic leftist view, since Obama wants him to “go”, he must be anti-American. But he says he is being attacked by Al Quaida, which means that he is presenting himself as pro-American. He wants to hang on, if possible, and if not, leave with as much of his vast wealth as possible still in his pockets (and, even more so, in the pockets of his nasty kids!). The US wants stability in Libya because its Israeli master needs stability. Europe wants stability in Libya because if fears a flood of illegal immigrants which it cannot absorb and because it fears a new Somalia on its doorstep. Israel fears an end to its comfortable domination of the region and would like to see “American stooges” installed, particularly in Egypt.
    Israel would love a war if removing Gadaffi started a rollback of the current Arab revolutions. It would also love to see Gadaffi survive if that would have the same effect. A quick “in and out” war would be fine, but the US bogged down in (yet another!) unwinnable fiasco would be a disaster for Israelwhich would discredit (and bankrupt) the US even more than it is already. If, on the other hand, the US does not attack Libya, then, as in Georgia, the myth of the invincible American Empire will take another hit. People all over the Middle East will realise that the US is not prepared to make war on them for the sake of Israel. More importantly, people in Israel will realise it! Thus, everybody, each for their own reasons, is caught in a “damned if we do, damned if we don’t” situation.
    The simplistic black v white mantras of the American left simply can’t deal with that level of complexity.

  2. shabnam said on March 12th, 2011 at 9:40am #

    {The US wants stability in Libya because its Israeli master needs stability.}

    Has anyone read such a silly line before? The axis of evil, US-Israel-Britain, need to DESTABILIZE a targeted country to intervene and take over the resources. There are numerous examples including Iran, Sudan, Somalia, Iraq, Pakistan, Afghanistan and other courtiers. The riot is supported by the criminal west.

    {In the simplistic leftist view, since Obama wants him to “go”, he must be anti-American.}

    This is not limited to Obama. The criminal West wants him to go, so they can occupy another Muslim country and steal their resources to feed their population. The terrorist state of Britain, France, and Israel want the same thing but as Mahdi Darisu Nezamroaya said: Britain and US play the ‘good cop’ and ‘bad cup’ to protect US image from further deterioration since US, like Britain and Israel is hated around the world.

    {But he says he is being attacked by Al Qaeda, which means that he is presenting himself as pro-American.}

    This is really silly. Gaddafi is using Al Qaeda the same way as Obama is using to frighten the population of the United States. He knows Al Qaeda is engineered by the US and does not exist. He knows al Qaeda is the axis of evil, US – Israel – Britain. Then, he uses this term not to antagonize the ignorant Western population further since they are BRAIN WASHED by the propaganda campaign. He is smart enough to use Al Qaeda instead of US –Israel – Britain to leave some room for future maneuvering.

  3. brianct said on March 12th, 2011 at 3:28pm #

    ‘This is really silly. Gaddafi is using Al Qaeda the same way as Obama is using to frighten the population of the United States. He knows Al Qaeda is engineered by the US and does not exist’

    great article but some silly misinformed comments. How do you know what Gadaffi is thinking , Shabnam?
    as for alqaeda, dont blame Gadaffi:

    ‘After a series of military crackdowns, Gadhafi gained the upper hand in dealing with his Islamist militant opponents, and the insurgency tapered off by the end of the 1990s. Many LIFG members fled the country in the face of the government crackdown and a number of them ended up finding refuge with groups like al Qaeda in places such as Afghanistan.
    ….
    etc
    http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/20110223-jihadist-opportunities-libya

  4. brianct said on March 12th, 2011 at 3:29pm #

    and
    ‘In a Nov. 3, 2007, audio message, al Qaeda No. 2 Ayman al-Zawahiri reported that the LIFG had formally joined the al Qaeda network. This statement came as no real surprise, given that members of the group have long been close to al-Zawahiri and Osama bin Laden. Moreover, the core al Qaeda group has long had a large number of Libyan cadre in its senior ranks, including men such as Abu Yahya al-Libi, Anas al-Libi, Abu Faraj al-Libi (who reportedly is being held by U.S. forces at Guantanamo Bay) and Abu Laith al-Libi, who was killed in a January 2008 unmanned aerial vehicle strike in Pakistan.

    Read more: Jihadist Opportunities in Libya | STRATFOR

    gadaffi is ONLY reporting what he has been told.

  5. shabnam said on March 12th, 2011 at 5:57pm #

    Thanks for Washington directed “revolution” in Tunis and Egypt where working hand in hand with US imperialism and Zionism to impose “no-fly zone” like in Iraq to kill Libyan people and topple another independent leader in a Muslim country. Down with the ARAB LEAGUE, Zionist/Imperialist PUPPET.

    Why Egyptian workers, Chomsky claims were the “Egyptian Revolution” backbone, has sided with phony ‘ leftists’ in the West, including Trotskyite groups and Green Stooges against Libya?

    Are Zionist supporters shaping the “opposition” groups from the Middle East who live abroad? It is very interesting to see that two words, Israel and zionism, have been purged from ‘opposition’ discourse and seldom they refer to ‘imperialism’ in their discussion, but ‘political Islam’, has become # 1 enemy. It is obvious that they have adopted the Islamophobia industry’s propaganda against Muslims.

    {The Arab League has backed the idea of a no-fly zone over Libya, as rebels continue to be pushed back by Colonel Gaddafi’s forces.
    A special meeting in Cairo voted to ask the UN Security Council to impose the policy until the current crisis ended.}

    {http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-12723554}

    Please watch the following VIDEO where Chomsky is interviewed by a green stooge, Hamid Dabashi, who has abandoned his “anti zionism” rhetoric since E. Said died, because he found a more profitable business, Green, to enter.
    Please notice that for these people, “Israel” and “Zionism” do not enter their analysis of the Middle East except. Chomsky hold “American Helicopters” responsible for Sheikh Ahmed Yassin assassination, not Israel expansionist policy. Why US want to assassinate Sheikh Yassin? what is the benefit? The green stooge, Dabashi, does not challenge Chomsky at all, even when he asked him: ” Why US wants to attack Iran?” Chomsky did not mention Israel here either, only ‘US imperialism”.

    {http://www.zcommunications.org/week-in-green-episode-39-interview-with-dr-noam-chomsky-by-noam-chomsky}

  6. hayate said on March 12th, 2011 at 7:04pm #

    One should realise the obvious. The jewish zionist corporate media lies about everything and should always be wholesale ignored and boycotted. The so-called alternatives which are also controlled by Jewish zionists (or sabbath goys) are essentially nothing more than ziofascist psy-ops disguised as an opposition media, which is directed at progressives and the left in order to neutralise opposition to israeloamerican 21st century nazi policies and criminality.

    There should be zero tolerance of these ziofascists/fascists.

  7. shabnam said on March 12th, 2011 at 9:41pm #

    Why the revolution in Tunis and Egypt didn’t change a damn thing in the Arab world. The aim of the directed ‘revolution’ was to improve US image in the region through “orderly changes” . The Arab league including Egypt and Tunis has just asked UN, on behalf of the United States, to impose a ‘no-fly zone’ in Libya. Shame on you. Does anyone know what is going on?

    It is obvious that the criminal West led by the US has asked their puppets, the Arab head of states, take the ‘initiative’ and on behalf of the US beg for ‘no-fly zone’ against AN INDEPENDENT LEADER, GADDAFI.
    We hate these stooges who have pushed our region into destruction. These puppet ‘leaders’ think they will save themselves by selling Arabs and their resources to the war criminals. We are fed up with them, we are fed up, we are….

    {{The United States on Saturday backed the Arab League’s call for the United Nations Security Council to impose a no-fly zone over Libya, and Washington said it was preparing for “all contingencies.”
    “We welcome this important step by the Arab League, which strengthens the
    international pressure on Gaddafi and support for the Libyan people,” the White House said in a statement.}}

    Arabs must react NOW. The West is against Gaddafi because he is the only LEADER who has worked, more than 7 times, towards ARAB UNITY, a dangerous move.
    ARAB LEAUGE is nothing but a puppet. They have brought nothing but SHAME to Arab population at large. Why the Egyptian ‘revolutionary’ workers allow Arab leauge to bring down another Muslim country like they did in Iraq?

    {http://www.alarabiya.net/articles/2011/03/12/141192.html}

  8. shabnam said on March 12th, 2011 at 9:44pm #

    brianct:

    Do you think Al Qaeda exist? If you do you must be ignorant to believe such a lie. Gaddafi knows that Al Qaeda does not exist and Bin Laden is death. Other leaders have said the same thing. You don’t know.

  9. David Silver said on March 13th, 2011 at 9:18am #

    Mary thank you for this analysis and especially the exposure and
    condemnation of what Stephen Gownas calls the soft left -revisioinist and
    opprtunists

    Dave Silver

  10. hayate said on March 13th, 2011 at 1:40pm #

    (Oops, accidentally cnp’d my old comment as well. Please delete the above comment)

    Britain’s Failed Intel Operation in Libya: Her Majesty’s Bungling “Secret Intelligence Service”

    by Felicity Arbuthnot

    March 12, 2011

    (excerpts)

    “The bungling bunch, are thought to have been assembled by the “Secret Intelligence Service”, a bit of an oxymoron, in the circumstances, clearly deficit in both intelligence and secrecy. The: “SIS collects secret intelligence and mounts covert operations overseas in support of British Government objectives”, states their website. The “objective” in this case is undoubtedly the largest oil deposits in Africa and the ninth largest in the world. Amongst the “values” which the SIS “upholds” is : “Integrity – we act within our legal framework and with the highest ethical and professional standards.” (1) Creeping illegally, in to a sovereign state, in the dead of night, armed to the teeth, with a bunch of dodgy passports, and surveillance equipment, seems to fall a little short on the “integrity” front, but we can all make mistakes. They certainly endorsed Colonel Gaddafi’s assertion that the uprisings were the result of “foreign interference”, though.

    The Foreign and Commonwealth Office hit another high score on the error front, unable to evacuate an estimated three thousand British oil workers from the initial chaos, whilst other countries, including some tiny, some very poor, were having no trouble sending in flights to bring their nationals home. All descended in to further absurdity, when it was announced that the war ship HMS Cumberland (from which the above insurgents deployed) was going to the rescue: “but would not dock until it was safe.”

    A plane that was finally chartered, was stuck at Gatwick airport for ten hours, with a technical hitch, the Foreign Minister and his staff apparently unable to find any others for charter any where on the planet. David Cameron said he was: “terribly sorry” for the plight of the stranded – and Deputy Prime Minister Clegg said he had “forgotten” he was in charge of the country.

    [http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=23660]

  11. shabnam said on March 13th, 2011 at 1:42pm #

    A good article by Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya, about the Arab puppets pose as ‘head of state’ but have sold Arab population to criminal west an and Zionism. The ‘revolutionary’ Egypt and Tunis are included.

    Why Arab journalists who post articles at this site NEVER expose Arab stooges and limit themselves only with the safe issue like, the “Palestinians”….!!!!

    {http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=23657}

    {{The Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) is an organization comprised of the petro-sheikdoms of Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Oman, and Saudi Arabia. They have betrayed Palestine, they worked against Iraq, they turned their backs on Lebanon, and now they are conspiring against Libya together with Washington and Brussels.

    In a blatant act of hypocrisy, the leaders of these sheikdoms have announced that Qaddafi’s regime is “illegitimate.” Forbes had this to say about the GCC announcement: “Gulf nations including Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) have withdrawn any sort of support for Muammar al-Gadhafi calling his regime ‘illegitimate’ and condoning its use of organized violence against a civilian population.” [1] Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Bahrain, Oman, the U.A.E., and Kuwait have withdrawn their recognition of Qaddafi’s regime as the legal government of Libya.}}

  12. 3bancan said on March 13th, 2011 at 1:43pm #

    Some good points by Mary Lynn Cramer.

    As to the “noble intention” of the zionazified NATO leaders in their support of anti-Qaddhafi regime, I’d go with Francis Boyle:

    [http://english.aljazeera.net/programmes/insidestory/2011/03/2011310161933903771.html]

  13. hayate said on March 13th, 2011 at 1:50pm #

    Point Of No Return: U.S. And NATO Prepare For War With Libya

    Rick Rozoff, March 8, 2011

    (excerpts)

    “The amassing of military assets – warships, warplanes, assault troops and special forces – near and in Libya means more than brinkmanship, demonstrates more than a show of strength, more than simply “sending a message.”

    So does the enforcement of a no-fly zone over the country, which is not a substitute for but a prelude to war. Last week Defense Secretary Gates acknowledged that “A no-fly zone begins with an attack on Libya to destroy the air defenses.”

    It in fact demands the grounding of a targeted nation’s aircraft and the neutralization if not destruction of its surveillance systems and anti-aircraft batteries.

    A no-fly regime is succeeded by war as day is followed by night. In Bosnia from 1992-1995 it led to a bombing campaign and the deployment of 60,000 NATO troops. In Yugoslavia in 1999 it was the opening move in an air war which resulted in 50,000 U.S. and NATO troops occupying part of the country’s territory. In Iraq from 1991-2003 it was the lead-up to an invasion and ongoing military occupation that will soon be eight years old.

    Britain and France, in close consultation with the U.S. and Germany (collectively the NATO Quad), are jointly writing a draft resolution for a no-fly zone over Libya to be presented to the Security Council. If the resolution is supported by nine or more of the fifteen nations on the Security Council and if permanent members China and Russia don’t veto it, the stage will be set for a series of further military actions by the U.S. and NATO against Libya, which will be presented by the West as UN-sanctioned, in a manner alarmingly evocative of the process used to prepare the attack on Iraq in 2003.”

    [http://rickrozoff.wordpress.com/2011/03/08/point-of-no-return-u-s-and-nato-prepare-for-war-with-libya]

    Rick Rozoff interviewed about nato’s war plans against Libya:

    [http://ruvr.ru/ruvrbanner/engrg/sounds/Rozoff.mp3]

  14. Rehmat said on March 13th, 2011 at 2:21pm #

    There is nothing ‘sloppy’ there. Most of these outlets are Zionist-Israel-Jewish mouthpieces. NPR, Democracy Now!, BBC, CNN, FoxNews, etc. project only which is good for Israel ….. to the US in a small portion.

    NPR’s Jewish CEO, Vivian Schiller was forced to resign recently as result of NPR’s campaigner Ron Schiller made some political wrong statements – Tea Party members are a bunch of Islamophobe …. Jews control the media,,,,,

    http://rehmat1.wordpress.com/2011/03/11/zionist-lobby-%e2%80%98thou-shalt-not-talk-ill-of-me%e2%80%99/

  15. 3bancan said on March 13th, 2011 at 5:47pm #

    One aspect is missing here: the speed with which the rapacious democratic (sic) countries have moved to freeze Libyan assets…

  16. shabnam said on March 13th, 2011 at 6:32pm #

    Please read the article written by Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya about Arab league has called UN to impose ‘no-fly zone’ in Libya. This act of war is carried out on behalf of the war mongers in Washington because the US is hated in the region and do not want to buy more hatred for themselves. Thus, they have asked their puppets, the Arabs, do it for them.

    Amr Moussa, the secretary-general of the Arab League, wants to run in the coming Egyptian election for president, thus, he HAS TO SHOW THAT HE IS A GOOD SERVANT. This act of Arab league shows very well that NO revolution has occurred in Egypt only a military coup to remove Mubarak who was an obstacle for US/Israel geopolitical policies. Otherwise everything is business AS USUAL.

    Juan Cole, State Department agent, who pose as a ‘progressive’ has been on the side of the war mongers on issue of Libya against Gaddafi to serve the interest of the Empire. He writes:

    {{The Arab League has indeed called for the United Nations Security Council to impose a no-fly zone over Libya. It is also moving to recognize the provisional government in Benghazi, and has delisted Qaddafi’s government in Tripoli from the League.
    This action is the most decisive the League has taken since it called for a rollback of Saddam Hussein’s occupation of Kuwait in 1990 and authorized League members to join the coalition of George H.W. Bush in pushing Iraq back out.Amr Moussa, the secretary-general of the Arab League, is rumored to be planning a run for president of Egypt in the elections scheduled for September; he led the charge on getting this resolution.}}

    Please notice that Juan Cole does not make it clear for his readers that behind the Arab league’s calling for ‘no fly zone’ is Washington.
    The same reasoning mentioned by the Arab league, has been given by a judeofascist, Paul Wolfowitz who led Americans into Iraq war to expand Israel’s interests, where left more than 1.5 millions Iraqis dead. He writes:

    {{There are three important U.S. actions that could speed up Gadhafi’s demise and stop the killing in Libya: recognize the newly formed national council in Benghazi as the government of Libya, provide assistance to the new Libyan authorities, and support the imposition of a no-fly zone over Libya.}}

    Now, the Arab puppets including the ‘revolutionary’ Egyptians have found that they have IDENTICAL interest regarding Gaddafi, an independent leader, with the Zionists and the war mongers in Washington.
    The African Unity, however, came against it and warned against any military action. The AU has supported Libyan people against the war mongers including the petty Arab league.

    {http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704823004576192852331022690.html?mod=googlenews_wsj}

  17. MARY LYNN CRAMER said on March 13th, 2011 at 6:55pm #

    IMPORTANT LISTENING: SPECIAL OPS ON INEVITABILITY OF WAR (MISSION CREEP) IN LIBYA

    Understanding No-Fly Zones And Their Implications
    March 13, 2011
    Listen to the Story
    All Things Considered

    The pressure on President Obama to intervene militarily in Libya is growing. Leaders from the Arab League called on the U.N. Security Council Saturday to impose a no-fly zone over the country. Former paratrooper and Afghanistan war veteran DB Grady discusses how no-fly zones work — and where such an intervention might lead.

    Understanding No-Fly Zones And Their Implications : NPR
    Mar 13, 2011 … Former paratrooper and Afghanistan war veteran DB Grady …

  18. shabnam said on March 13th, 2011 at 9:30pm #

    {Understanding No-Fly Zones And Their Implications : NPR}

    At this site NO ONE read the lies from NPR.

    {Leaders from the Arab League called on the U.N. Security Council Saturday to impose a no-fly zone over the country.}

    The Arab league is nothing but a PUPPET. This decision has not been taken by the Arab league, rather has been forced upon the Arab league by the war criminals in Washington but is coming out of the Arab league’s mouth not to increase the hatred of people in the region against Obama and the State Department.
    The people of the region cannot be fooled by the United States and her extension, the war criminals. OR NPR.

  19. hayate said on March 14th, 2011 at 1:32am #

    More embarrassing news on those Brit “Keystone commandos”: ;D

    Soldiers leave secret codes in Libya

    March 14, 2011 7:34AM

    “BRITISH commando units are scrambling to prevent a serious security breach in Libya.

    Libyan rebels discovered that soldiers captured during a bungled operation were carrying scraps of paper with the usernames and passwords for secret computer systems.

    Sources in Benghazi, the largest Libyan city in opposition control, told British newspaper The Sunday Times last week that they seized a cache of communications equipment when the joint MI6 and Special Air Service (SAS) mission went wrong nine days ago – and also found the details needed to access the computers on notes among their captives’ belongings.

    Several pieces of equipment were even said to have labels saying, “Secret: UK eyes only.”

    “It is so inept, it is unbelievable,” one expert said….”

    And it gets even better:

    [http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/ipad/soldiers-leave-secret-codes-in-libya/story-fn6t2xg9-1226020863025]