Libya – The Big Lie About Our Humanitarian Intervention

0
Share

I read a fascinating article by Russ Baker which I want to share, not only because of the supporting evidence he provides, but because of the logical progression of events that he details as to why we went into Libya for “humanitarian” causes while ignoring  humanitarian causes in Syria, the Congo, and so on.

It’s an important story and one the media is not covering –

Muammar Qaddafi was a thug, brutal by all accounts, and he will not be missed. Oddly, we easily could have captured him when he was here trying to set up a tent in New Jersey two years ago, but we didn’t.  Instead, we had established ties with him. Bush and Rove lauded the new relationship and in 2009, Lieberman praised the importance of our new ally in the war on terrorism. Goldman Sachs had gone into Libya, their new friend, and began to lose an enormous amount of Qaddafi’s money.

There is also sufficient evidence that neither Qaddafi nor Mugrahi had anything to do with the Lockerbie bombing. They both still insist they had nothing to do with it and the evidence they did appears to be based on the accounts and liars and betrayers. Qaddafi offered reparations in an attempt to ease relations.

Then, what brought us into Libya with NATO?

To quote Baker: We were told from the beginning that the major purpose of what was to be very limited bombing—indeed, its sole purpose—was to protect those Libyan civilians rebelling against an oppressive regime from massive retaliation by Qaddafi. Perhaps because of NATO’s initial intervention, the feared Qaddafi-sponsored, genocidal bloodletting never did occur. (At least, not beyond the military actions one would expect a government to take when facing a civil war:  after all, remember General Sherman’s “scorched earth” policy in the US Civil War?). However, protecting civilians apparently didn’t generate sufficient public support for intervention, so we started to hear about other purported reasons for it.  Qaddafi was encouraging his soldiers to…commit mass rape! And giving them Viagra! And condoms!

The evidence of mass rape does not appear to exist, but it served the purpose of enraging people against Qaddafi to make the “limited” bombing acceptable to protect Libyans, an idea that would not fly with the war-weary Americans without this deception. We continue to condemn Qaddafi who is fighting to win this Civil War while NATO has engaged in over 7000 bombing runs at a $ 1million a pop, leaving death and destruction in its wake. Ironic, isn’t it?

The French objected to and were threatened by Qaddafi’s close relationship with the Italians over oil as were the British. The United States has always been threatened by Qaddafi’s close dealings with Putin. There is another factor, and that is the Libya-African connection, which is not something Sarkozy wanted to continue.

So how spontaneous was Libya’s spontaneous uprising?

From Baker:

What the media has so relentlessly characterized as the “spontaneous uprising” of February 2011 was hardly spontaneous. It began even before the Arab Spring itself commenced in Tunisia during December of last year—and it was orchestrated by the West.

In October 2010, Qaddafi’s protocol chief, Nouri Al-Mesmari, arrived in France, purportedly for medical treatment. But he had his family with him, and the declared reason for his trip was a cover story. He almost immediately plunged into talks with the French and their intelligence service. He argued that Qaddafi was weak. He pointed out breaches in Qaddafi’s national security shield that made it possible to take him down. (More on this can be found on the subscription-newsletter site “Africa Intelligence.”)

In December, Mesmari was joined by three Western-educated Libyan businessmen who had years earlier staged an unsuccessful revolt against Qaddafi. It didn’t take long for the French government of Nicolas Sarkozy to sign on to a covert effort to topple Qaddafi. There are multiple possible reasons for this, including intra-European competition, notably with the Italians, who enjoyed a particularly close relationship with Qaddafi and an inside track on Libya’s oil. In addition, the French were deeply concerned about illegal immigration from Arab and African countries,via Libya, that they felt was tolerated or even encouraged by Qaddafi. The French began talking with the British, who shared many of their concerns and a history of cooperation on covert projects.

In November, a French trade delegation, including representatives of multinational corporations, traveled to Benghazi in Eastern Libya. That delegation has been characterized by Africa Intelligence’s Maghreb Confidential as having included French military officials under commercial cover, assessing the possibilities on the ground.

In fact, Sarkozy wanted a Mediterranean Union, which operates like the EU and included Israel. Qaddafi saw such as a union dangerous because of the threat of Jihadism if Israel was included. He did not feel that the Jihadists could be kept at bay in such an event….

Egypt followed quickly and the perfect storm was created. I personally have my doubts that some of these other uprisings weren’t also orchestrated. For instance, President Obama’s speech in Egypt is credited with empowering and encouraging the Egyptian rebels, but that is another story.

Baker explains –

On February 27, a National Transitional Council, made up of politicians, ex-military officers, tribal leaders, businessmen and academics, announced its launching in Benghazi as the rebel leadership. Not surprisingly, no mention was made of the French back story.

The Italian intelligence services, intent on preserving that country’s advantageously close relationship with Qaddafi, began trying to leak what was going on. (More on the extent of the coziness between Libya and Italian oil companies, and between Qaddafi and Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi here.) When it proved unable to stop the operation, the Italian government seemingly decided to switch and try to head this particular parade, lest the spoils go to the others.

The United States was late to this affair, but determined to get its share of the picnic. The US has been as nervous about Qaddafi’s relationship with Russia’s Putin as France was about his ties to Italy…

The Telegraph leaked information that the UK and US were involved in the surprise uprising for weeks before it occurred, as early as August, NATO troops were on the ground. Read more here: WhoWhatandWhy

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share