Death squads have been released upon the people of Tripoli. We can even see them on the screens of their friends in the corporate media. We can see them firing their guns in the air and at everything that moves. We can see them looting houses, rampaging through the city; these hoards, these bandits, cheered on by ruthless intelligence agents posing as journalists.
Hospitals are over flowing with dead bodies, people are being beheaded in the streets, black people are being lynched, tortured, beheaded, eviscerated. The mainstream press even admits that thousands of Gaddafi supporters have been massacred. They call it ‘settling of accounts’ as though it is perfectly normal, perfectly acceptable. After all, these people supported Gaddafi, so they deserve to be raped, tortured, burned alive, beheaded.
We have reports of patients being taken out of hospitals and murdered. Yet Amnesty International, in order to deflect from the atrocities of the NATO death squads, suggest that some of the patients in the hospitals could have been murdered by ‘Gaddafi’s forces’.
Now where did you get those rumours Amnesty International? Why do you suspect that a government currently under siege from the combined forces of the richest and most powerful nations on earth would have the time or malevolent will to go into hospitals and murder the patients there, murder doctors who they so desperately need? Why haven’t you investigated the PROOF of rebels going into hospitals in Benghazi, dragging Libyan soldiers out by the ears and hanging them over the entrances?
They even filmed it for you and posted it on the internet. Do you have any other sources of information other than NATO and their death squads? Why haven’t you investigated it? Is it okay now Amnesty International, is it okay now to behead black people? Or is this all part of Gaddafi’s ‘propaganda’ plan? Were the beheadings carried out under ‘Gaddafi’s orders’?
Muammar Gaddafi who so hates the black race that he set up the African Union, Muammar Gaddafi who so hates the black race that he wears the portraits of all the African heroes on his robes, the African heroes murdered by the CIA and their cronies since Black African countries achieved independence, thanks to training and funding from Tripoli? Are you afraid Amnesty International? Afraid of losing your credibility by criticizing the powers who fund and promote you?
Why didn’t you investigate the outrageous racist allegations that the Libyan forces were using ‘black mercenaries’, allegations which lead to the massacres of hundreds of black Libyan families right throughout this war? Why didn’t you condemn the disgusting use of the term ‘African mercenaries’? Did you not know that Libya is in Africa? Did you not know that there are thousands of black Libyans serving in the Libyan Armed Forces and police, just like America, Britain, France and other countries?
Why are you continuing to cover for NATO’s crimes? Why haven’t you condemned NATO’s arming of the rebels, in violation of international law? Why haven’t you condemned NATO’s deployment of mercenaries, in violation of international law?
NATO have carpet bombed Sirte yesterday.
Did you hear about that Amnesty International? So far more than 400 civilians dead. NATO’s hoards are systematically terrorizing the people of Tripoli, all of whom support Gaddafi. We know this because they all demonstrated that support throughout the war. We saw them on the streets of Tripoli on July 1st, all 1.7 million of them, waving green flags and holding up portraits of their leader.
We know this because you cannot bomb a country for six months, day and night, bombing and bombing and bombing and killing and killing , just like Vietnam, just like Laos, Just like Cambodia, just like the bombing of over 30 countries by US imperialism in the last century, you cannot bomb a country and expect its inhabitants to like you. It did not take long to oust Ben Ali of Tunisia nor Mubarak of Egypt, because neither of those leaders had the overwhelming popular support of Muammar Gaddafi. That’s why the target of NATO bombings is not ‘Gaddafi’s forces’, the target is the Libyan population.
Why have you not published more information about your directors, Amnesty International? We know, for example, that the mastermind of Al Qaeda, former US National Security Advisor Zbigniew Bzrezinski, was one of your directors when his Al Qaeda thugs were raping and mutilating men and women in socialist Afghanistan during the 1980s, while you only concentrated on harassing the legitimate government of the country which was trying to stop them!
What a disgusting and discredited cabal of liars you all are! We will expose you Amnesty International, we will expose you for the scoundrels that you are, the scoundrels that you have always been, the whores of Western imperialism that you have always been.
When humanity needed independent humanitarian observers most, you were always on the side of the North Atlantic Terrorist Organisation, the US/EU rapists of the planet. You, who thrive on ‘humanitarian intervention’ in the form of depleted uranium bombs, cluster bombs, death squads and mass murder, which you pathetically attempt to attribute to the victims in order to protect the perpetrators.
In order to maintain your credibility among the uncritical, you sometimes make concessions to truth, you sometimes admit that the ‘good guys’ nominated by the Western military-industrial-media complex, have committed some crimes.
Yet, you know what is happening on the ground; you know this is a colonial war of conquest; you know that the rebels are deranged psychopaths; you know that many of them are not even Libyan; you know that they are raping women en masse; you know that they are lynching and torturing black people and you know that the Libyan government had one of the best human rights records in the world ; you know that it was the Gaddafi Charity Foundation that revealed and condemned abuses of prisoners in Libyan prisons; you’ve read the UN report on human rights in Gaddafi’s Libya; you know that political prisoners in Libya were Al Qaeda, the same people who are now slaughtering the civilian population, lead by NATO special forces, Apache helicopters and ceaseless bombardment from the air. You know this is imperialism; you know that it is NATO and not the Libyan Armed Forces who are committing war crimes and crimes against humanity . You know all of this because you are part of it. You are an essential part of it all. You provide ‘humanitarian’ and ‘human rights’ cover for the crimes of imperialism.
The richest and most egalitarian country in Africa is being bombed into the stone age and ‘human rights’ groups are doing everything they can to make us love it. Amnesty International are nothing but the filthy public relations whores of fascism.
Saturday, August 27, 2011
Tuesday, August 23, 2011
From the makers of "Gaddafi is killing his own people" Doha studio presents" The Libyan Revolution"
picture source:http://cyaegha-c.livejournal.com/460657.html
Surpassing previous mass media fabrications, both in scale and boldness, yesterday morning's Al Jazeera mise-en-scène will surely go down in history as one of the most cynical hoaxes committed by corporate media since the manipulated pictures of Iraqis topplying Saddam Hussein's statue after the US invasion in 2003.
On the morning of August 22nd 2011, Al Jazeera aired a 'live' report from Green Square in Tripoli,which claimed to show the capture of the Libyan capital by rebel forces. Scenes of jubilation and euphoria enveloped Al Jazeera's reporter Zeina Khodr as she declared: " Liya is in the hands of the opposition''
The images were immediately reproduced throughout the global media complex, with headlines trumpeting the 'end of the Gaddafi regime' and editorials throughout the corporate media world speculating about the post-Gaddafi future of Libya.
Gaddafi's sons were said to have been arrested, and more defections were announced. The Libyan capital was, we were told, now in the hands of the rebel forces. For many, it seemed a fait accompli.
In fact, the Al Jazeera pictures from Green Square were an elaborate and criminal hoax. The report had been prefabricated in a studio in Doha Qatar . This information had been passed onto Libyan intelligence and the Libyan people had already been warned about the qatari psyops a couple of days previously on Rayysse state television.
The Al Jazeera hoax was intended to create the impression that Tripoli had fallen so as:
(1) to break the Libyan resistance by creating panic and chaos in the Libyan captial.
(2) to provide cover for the massacres of civilians that would occur in the days following the declaration of rebel victory.
In other words, the media would provide cover for the war crimes and crimes against humanity that are necessary in order to subjugate the Libyan Jamhahirya to Western corporate interests.
Shortly after the Al Jazeera pictures were released, this author contacted independent reporter Lizzie Phelan in Tripoli. Miss Phelan was able to confirm from what she described as realiable sources that the Al Jazeera pictures were false.
By the end of the day, it emerged that all the twitter lies emanating from the criminals in the National Transitional Council were also, unsurprisingly, false. Gaddafi's sons had not been arrested, and the rebels were not in control of the city.
In the meantime, Lizzie Phelan, Mahdi Darius Nemenroaya and Thierry Meysan have receieved death threats from CNN producers staying in the Rixos Hotel in Tripoli. After the arrival of thousands of NATO/Al Qaeda terrorists, a brief period of chaos ensued in the city.
When many of the mainstream reporters abandoned the Rixos Hotel, Libyan authorities discovered that most of them were CIA and MI6 agents working undercover as journalists.
At present, Mahdi Darius Nezemroaya, Thierry Meysan and other real journalists remain trapped in the Rixos Hotel. Nezemroaya was fired upon by a NATO/rebel sniper when he attempted to place a press sign on top of the Rixos hotel to protect the building from NATO bombardement.
Reporter Lizzie Phelan contacted a friend yesterday to say that she had been threatened by CNN personnel and had been blocked from using facebook and email.
Below, you can see the warning given to the Libyan people by state media of Al Jazeera's coming psyops. The presenter tells the viewers that Al Jazeera have produced a simulation of Tripoli's Green Square, and that they are going to use this to produce a gigantic fiction of 'liberated' Libya.
The picture above proves that the producers of the Al Jazeera hoax are no Dutch masters, as the glaring discrepancies between the real Green Square in Tripoli and the Al Jazeera version are patently obvious. The differences between the architecture in Green Square in Tripoli and the pictures shown in Al Jazeera are well documented in the video below.
While the Al Jazeera mise-en-scène is entertaining, the leading actress Zeina Khodr is unlikey to receive awards for her rather slugish performance. She said her lines rather mechanically, as one who was not particularly enamoured of the script, or perhaps it was the far-fetched aspect of the entire screen play that bothered her.
This media hoax is another poignant example of the desperation of NATO, who have ruthlessly bombed a sovereign nation for 6 months and have so far failed to effect regime change. It also proves yet again the role of the corporate media in disinformation and war-mongering.
Monday, August 22, 2011
From Operation Odyssey Dawn to Operation Siren: Colonel Gaddafi as Homeric Hero.
Since renaissance times, graduates of Greek and Latin literature in Britain, France and other imperial countries were often recruited by the secret service agencies. There were several reasons for this: graduates who could read the classics of Greek and Latin literature in the original languages tended to have good analytical and linguistic skills and a deep knowledge of history and culture.
Attention to detail and the capacity to read complex codes and signs are essential for intelligence work. On October 29th 2010, the British newspaper Express quoted the head of Britain’s secret service MI6 Johnathon Evans, a classical scholar, saying that classics should be taught in state schools “on the grounds that learning Latin and Greek would help “develop the kinds of skills that would-be spies need”.[1]
Given the centrality of Greek and Latin in the education of the European aristocracy in the past, it comes as no surprise that the current war on Libya was baptized “Operation Odyssey Dawn”. Scholars of the centuries identified many of the locations that feature in Homer’s epic poem in Malta, Sicily and the Mediterranean Sea where NATO’s air and sea forces are currently based.
European elites clearly see this current military adventure as akin to the trials and tribulations of Homer’s hero Odysseus who spent 10 long years attempting to return to his homeland of Ithaca after the Trojan War to liberate his palace from treacherous suitors who were attempting to woo his wife Penelope in his absence.
After many adventures and mishaps, the Homeric hero finally returns to Ithaca, joining up with his son Telemachus(the far-fighter), killing all the suitors occupying his palace.
But the question concerning Libya is: who is playing the role of Odysseus here?
The eponymous hero of Homer’s epic poem is described by the Greek bard as resourceful, wily, smart, fearless, charming, righteous and intelligent. Homer’s most frequently used epithets for Odysseus are‘polytropos’, of many twists and turns, ‘polymeros’,many-faceted and ‘metis’, cunning.
The most distinguishing aspect of this war has been the inversion of language to represent a false reality. So, the ‘protection of civilians’ means the bombardment of civilian targets; the Gaddafi regime means the majority of the population of Libya who support their government; ‘rebels’ and sometimes ‘revolutionaries’ are the euphemisms used to disguise jihadist terrorists’; the crimes of the rebels have been ascribed to the government forces and rebel retreats have been presented as advances.
It is hardly likely, therefore, that NATO considers their hated enemy, Muammar Gaddafi as an Odyssean hero fighting to free his country from greedy parasites. Yet, like Odysseus, Gaddafi has resisted NATO’s bombardment for 6 months.
Like Odysseus, part of Gaddafi’s country is currently being occupied by violent and treacherous parasites in the service of NATO. Like Odysseus, Gaddafi has managed to escape capture and death from the most gigantic and formidable forces on the planet.
Many classical etymologists derive the word Odysseus from the Greek ‘odyssomai’(ὀδύσσομαι ), meaning “to be wroth against, hated”[2]
Is there any other figure in the international media today more hated, more demonized than Muammar Gaddafi?
In Homer’s Odyssey, the suitors who occupy the eponymous hero’s palace attempt to persuade his wife Penelope that Odysseus is dead, that he will never return and that she should choose a new husband.
The international corporate media have been spreading the same lies and rumours about Gaddafi since the outbreak of the war in March this year.
When hostilities began in February, the British foreign minister William Hague declared that the Libyan leader had fled to Venezuela. The claim was false.
Claims were recently made that Gaddafi’s son Khamis had been killed. The claims were false. On Sunday August 21st International Criminal Court prosecutor, Luis Moreno Ocampo-the man who told the astonishingly absurd lie about Gaddafi ordering Viagra for his troops so they could rape women-- told Reuters news agency that Gaddafi’s on Saif Al Islam had been captured by the rebels.[3]
Ocampo’s claim has been dismissed by Mathaba news agency. [4]
Gaddafi has continued to survive. Whether one likes the guide of the Libyan Green Revolution or not, it is clear that the Libyan people love their leader and that he is a man of unquestionable ability.
Only a leader of Odyssean qualities would be capable of resisting the aggression of the most powerful nations on earth for the best part of 40 years; instituting a political system that has the support of the people; creating the wealthiest and most egalitarian country in Africa and finally, surviving continuous aerial bombardment, economic blockades and invasions of foreign mercenaries for 6 months.
Did the planners of Operation Odyssey Dawn unwittingly dramatise themselves as the vengeful god Poseidon , punishing a superhero protected by Athena, the goddess of wisdom?
Operation Siren: psychological warfare to break the Libyan resistance.
According to the French newspaper Le Parisien on Saturday August 20th, the spokesman for the National Transition Council in Benghazi , announced the commencement of Operation Siren. The operation is being carried out by NATO forces in conjunction with rebels on the ground and aims to take Tripoli by ousting Colonel Gaddafi and his regime, [5] according to the Libyan NCT spokesman,
In book 12 of Homer’s poem, Odysseus and his men confront the challenge posed by the enchanting sounds of the Siren’s song. In Greek and Homeric mythology the Sirens were bird-women and seductresses who lured unsuspecting sailors to shipwreck and destruction.
The songs of the sirens were said to be impossible to resist but Odysseus had previously been warned about the nefarious bird-women by the sorceress Circe;
‘To the Sirens first shalt thou come, who bewitch all men, whosoever shall come to them. Whoso draws nigh them unwittingly and hears the sound of the Sirens' voice, never doth he see wife or babes stand by him on his return, nor have they joy at his coming; but the Sirens enchant him with their clear song, sitting in the meadow, and all about is a great heap of bones of men, corrupt in death, and round the bones the skin is wasting. But do thou drive thy ship past, and knead honey-sweet wax, and anoint therewith the ears of thy company, lest any of the rest hear the song; but if thou myself art minded to hear, let them bind thee in the swift ship hand and foot, upright in the mast-stead, and from the mast let rope-ends be tied, that with delight thou mayest hear the voice of the Sirens. And if thou shalt beseech thy company and bid them to loose thee, then let them bind thee with yet more bonds’[6]
Odysseus survives by asking his men to bind him to the mast of the ship so he can hear the sirens. knead honey-sweet wax, and anoint therewith the ears of thy company, lest any of the rest hear the song / the sailors put wax in their ears so they won’t hear the song and be drawn into destruction.
The Parisien report goes on to claim that it is no longer possible to evacuate foreign nationals in Tripoli as a Maltese ship which was due to evacuate Polish citizens has come under fire. However, the report does not say who exactly fired on the ship. According to the Polish foreign ministry, negotiations are underway with the rebels in order to secure the evacuation of Polish citizens in the country. [7]
However, the Reuters version of the same report gives more information about Polish citizens attempting to flee the besieged city of Tripoli. According to the report, 250 Polish families are currently in Tripoli.
“The ministry was not immediately available to confirm the report.
Poland has evacuated most of its citizens from Libya and moved its ambassador from Tripoli to rebel-held Benghazi, but some 250 people from mixed Polish-Libyan families have stayed behind, the ministry official added.
One family had hoped to leave on the Maltese ship, the MV Triva 1”. [8]
The above-cited French newspaper did not mention that the report had NOT actually been confirmed by the Polish foreign ministry and the Reuters report states that out of 250 people of mixed Polish-Libyan families only one family hoped to leave on the Maltese ship.
Both the Reuters and Le Parisien reports also claim that ‘heavy fighting’ has broken out in Tripoli between “remnants” of the “Gaddafi regime” and “rebels”, who, it appears, are about to capture the Libyan capital.
Le Parisien quotes Italian foreign minister Franco Frattini saying that “the tragedy is coming to an end” as the rebels will soon capture Tripoli. Frattini also assures Italian companies that previous contracts signed with the Gaddafi government will be respected as soon as the NTC takes over. [9]
What is the significance of the Maltese ship here? Why is NATO so concerned about getting a ship into Tripoli to evacuate foreign nationals when the unconfirmed reports cited only one Polish family hoping to flee the Libyan capital? To whom is the NTC president talking when he warns of a ‘catastrophic end’ for Gaddafi and his people?
Is NATO attempting to use a ‘humanitarian’ vessel as a Trojan Horse to deliver terrorists to Libya? Is another humanitarian narrative being written to justify NATO troops on the ground to ‘liberate’ Tripoli? Why do the reports not confirm who exactly fired upon the Maltese ship? Why does the report state that officials are negotiating with rebels to bring the ship into Tripoli? The rebels are not in control of the city.
Independent reporter and political analyst Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya has claimed that NATO is now embarking on a sophisticated psychological warfare operation to create panic and fear among the Libyan population in order to break their resistance to NATO’s terrorists. It is clear that Operation Siren is the name of NATO’s new terror campaign.
The same reporter told Russia Today that he had been fired upon by snipers. Nazemroaya also said that a CNN producer had issued death threats to CNN journalists in the Rixos Hotel in Tripoli.
The websites of Libyan state newspapers Al Jamahirya, Al Yosberides, Azzaf Alakhdar and Al Fair Aljadeed have been suspended.
NATO may now attempt to cut power and communication lines in Tripoli, create a state of chaos and fear in the streets, backed up with a mass rumour campaign in order to break the resistance of the Libyan people and prepare the conquest of Tripoli.
There have been reports in the Libyan television station Rayysse of an elaborate hoax prepared by Al Jazeera in which scenes of Tripoli being overrun by rebel forces are fabricated.
Rayysse reported on Friday August 19th:
“an anonymous source reports that NATO will try its last card, it seems that they have reproduced the background of Tripoli in a studio in Doha, Bab Aziziya in particular, and that they are going to simulate a takeover of Tripoli, after they cause a general blackout, cutting electricity and transmissions. The aim is to break the morale of the brave Libyans and fool them, so as to lead the city and the country into a chaotic state.”[10]
This morning August 22th Al Jazeera broadcast a report from Tripoli’s Green Square which they claimed was now in control of the rebels. The reporter Zeina Khodr declared “ this city is now in the hands of the opposition”
In a message on facebook, independent journalist Lizzie Phelan, who has been reporting from Libya since the start of the war declared:
“I now have from reliable sources that the Libyan army is still in control of Tripoli. Al Jazeera footage of Green Square was fake. Gaddafi went to Green Square with his sons. Things are much calmer now”
Al Jazeera, the television station owned by the Emir of Qatar, has been a driving force in the media war on Libya since the start of hostilities there. In February the Qatari station aired a video which they claimed showed peaceful protestors in Benghazi being fired upon by ‘Gaddafi’s forces’.
The video was subsequently located and published on the internet.
It clearly shows pro-Gaddafi demonstrators being fired upon by unknown snipers. The video was edited by Al Jazeera to suit their agenda of demonizing the Libyan government and creating the pretext for “humanitarian” intervention by NATO and the Gulf dictatorships.[11]
In a press release on August 21st, Libyan government spokesman Dr. Moussa Ibrahim, confirmed that over 1300 people had been killed and 900 injured in Tripoli within 12 hours of rebel attacks. Although dozens of rebels have been captured and they have not captured the city, the final phase of NATO’s brutal destruction of Libya is likely to end in a bloodbath. [12]
In spite of media claims of ‘game over’ for Gaddafi, the Libyan armed forces have cleared the rebels from Misrata, Zawia, Garman, Sormon and Sabratha in the last few days[13] It is clear that the majority of the Libyan people still support Colonel Gaddafi.
Conclusion.
Though the mainstream media chant about “Gaddafi’s last stand”, Operation Siren is the last desperate attempt of the North Atlantic Terrorist Organisation to enslave the Libyan population. If this war is not stopped now, there will be a humanitarian catastrophe in Libya.An anonymous NGO report published on August 21st states on the 108morris108 channel on utube states:
"All the carnage was distant until night fell then the sea boiled over with small fast boats that dumped ten or more special forces and Al Qaida killers at hundreds of points along the beach in and around Tripoli. The slaughter began at that moment. The distraction of the small gangs inside the city proved successful and allowed the unfettered invasion from the sea. Killing hundreds of thousands of Libyans in the next few days may be the result of this full fledged attack on a sovereign nation by NATO" [14]
NATO's rebels are facing a population of over 2 million Tripolitan citizens who have been armed by the government. These brave people, ignored by the world, will fight for the rights and freedoms that are theirs, the cities and towns that are theirs, the future of their families and children.
NATO’s sirens may beam their evil songs but the people of Tripoli are singing back to them. “Alla, Muammar, Libya bas” The Libyan people have three muses, Allah, Muammar and the land of Libya.
Perhaps NATO thinks it is winning this media war. But they would do well to consider the fate of the Sirens before committing ground troops to crush the Libyan people. The medieval writer Stephanus of Byzantium tells the story of a competition between the sirens and the Greek muses. When the sirens won the singing competition, the muses plucked the feathers from their wings. The sirens turned white and fell into the sea.
[1] http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/208177
[2]http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0057%3Aentry%3Do%29du%2Fssomai
[3] http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/08/21/us-libya-rebels-tripoli-idUSTRE77K2EX20110821
[4] http://mathaba.net/news/?x=628171
[5]http://www.leparisien.fr/intervention-libye/libye-pour-isoler-kadhafi-les-rebelles-lancent-l-operation-sirene-21-08-2011-1573322.php
[6] http://www.literaturepage.com/read/theodyssey-177.html
[7] http://www.leparisien.fr/intervention-libye/libye-pour-isoler-kadhafi-les-rebelles-lancent-l-operation-sirene-21-08-2011-1573322.php
[8] http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=maltese-ship-heading-for-tripoli-un
[9] http://www.leparisien.fr/intervention-libye/libye-pour-isoler-kadhafi-les-rebelles-lancent-l-operation-sirene-21-08-2011-1573322.php
[10] http://libyasos.blogspot.com/2011/08/al-jazeera-and-nato-planning-major-scam.html
[11] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qb2qL9UOxuA
[12] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mpbjSPHOdZQ&feature=share
[13] http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL1108/S00205/susan-lindauer-libya-gadhaffi-retakes-key-towns.htm
[14]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jFGsmJMd_fo&feature=player_embedded
Thursday, August 11, 2011
More NATO crimes against humanity in Libya: A letter to the "Irish Anti-War Movement"
During the nights of the 8th and 9th of August, NATO jets bombed a refugee centre in the little village of Zliten, near the Libyan capital Tripoli. The NATO missiles blew 86 unarmed civilians to bits. 33 of them were children. Nato has denied the charges but the video below provides the dirty, incontrovertible proof of NATO's war crimes and crimes against humanity.
Since NATO began this war of aggression against Libya five months ago, under the fabricated pre-text of 'protecting civilians', they have failed to 'pacify' the North African nation. What is the reason for this failure? The reason is simple: Libya is one of the most democratic countries in the world and the Libyan people do not want to give up their hard-earned freedoms to be occupied by foreign powers and their corrupt domestic puppets of the so-called National Transitional Council.
The Great People's Socialist Libyan Arab Jamahirya is run by over 460 people's committees. There is no central government in Libya; rather,each resident of the country is a member of a local popular assembly. As Geoff Simons writes in his wonderful book 'Libya: the struggle for survival':
"The aim has been to sustain the sovereignty of individual Libyan citizens through the creation of popular assemblies(mutamarat) and committees(lijan; in such a system that the committee is pervasive at every political level and in every social sector.Every resident belongs to a sovereign popular assembly at the district level; members meet for an annual week of evening sessions to receive reports on local matters and to agree an agenda of important issues(such issues can range widely; from the relation between law and Islam to foreign aid, from policies on expatriates to economic development). The chairman and other mandated delegates carry the findings and conclusions of the meetings to the annual National Assemby which in turn takes its majority decisions to the secretariats"
The entire Libyan population is armed and the overwhelming majority of Libyans support the guide of the Libyan Green revolution Muammar Gaddafi. Now, you may not like the eccentric looking Libyan leader, dear reader, but the Libyan people do. There are no examples in human history of unpopular autocrats arming the entire population. Unpopular regimes never arm their subjects, for obvious reasons.
The NATO-backed rebels have never had popular support among the Libyan people. They are comprised mainly of the Libyan Islamic Fighting group, a rebel army formed by the CIA in Sudan during the 1970s when the country was ruled by CIA operative Gaafar Nimeiry. There is also CIA group, the National Front for the Salvation of Libya and other motley factions who would like to see a restoration of the British puppet Sanusi monarchy, and there is, of course,the ever nebulous international conspiracy called Al Qaeda. The city of Darnah in Eastern Libya has always been major recruiting ground for Islamist terrorists. One of the Al Qaeda leaders currently fighint NATO's war is Abu Sufian Ibhramhim Ammed Amuda bin Qumu. Bin Qumu was a former detainee in Guantanimo Bay. He was trained in the CIA-funded terrorist camps of Afghanistan during America's covert war against the Soviet Union. He was moved to Guantanimo Bay after the American invasion of Afghanistan and has now been deployed to Libya to fight against the Libyan republic. Other CIA/AL Qaeda operatives are Al Hasidi and Khalifa Hifter.
The 'rebels' of Benghazi have received extensive military support from the Qatar dictatorship as well as media cover and propaganda from the television station owned by the Emir of Qatar, Al Jazeera.
Working in conjunction with Western intelligence, Al Jazeera/Arabic and Al Jazeera/English have marketed themselves as 'independent' television stations. This marketing involved mild criticism of Israel and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
However, since the CIA-fomented war against the Libyan people and the covert war against Syria, Al Jazeera has been the most important asset of the Pentagon's information war.
Judging by the TOTAL silence of the so-called 'anti-war' groups, it would appear that Al Jazeera and the pentagon have won the war thus far. Although Al Jazeera have been caught lying over and over again about Libya and Syria, Trotskites and many other 'leftists' do not seem to have noticed.
The Irish trotskyites and their European counterparts are a good example of this unfathomable gullibility. These soi-disant'revolutionary socialist' and 'anti-capitalist' groups have backed the CIA contras in Benghazi against the popular democratic Jamahirya.
The utterly risible views of these groups emanate principally from such eminanet intellectual fraudsters as Gilbert Ashgar and Noam Chomsky. Both of these authors swallowed the lies of Al Jazeera, CNN and BBC hook, line and sinker and they've been joined by a chorus of prattling sycophants.
In an interview Noam Chomsky gave with the BBC on March 8th 2011 after the CIA-backed uprising, he called the Benghazi rebellion a 'popular revolution' and Al Jazeera was, he stessed, "one of the best news services in the world".
Unsurprisingly, that is also the view of US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton who recently praised the quality of debate on Al Jazeera and complained about news stations such as Russia Today that were winning the media war against U.S imperialism. So Chomsky and Hillary Clinton are in perfect agreement on the outstanding quality of Al Jazeera!
In the above-mentioned interview Chomsky gave to the BBC, the MIT professor and 'cognitive scientist' went on to call Muammar Gaddafi a 'brutal dictator'. Muammar Gaddafi left office in 1974. Since, then, he has held no official function in the country, other than a highly symbolic role as ideologue of the revolution; his high prestige and devotion to the green revolution have given Gaddafi enormous symbolic power, such that when he speaks for or to the nation, everyone listens. Have you read any of Gaddafi's speeches Mr. Chomsky? Or his Green Book? Obviously not.
Gaddafi is not a dictator. He does not have the powers to override decisions of the general congress. For example, many years ago, Gaddafi advocated abolishing the death penalty in Libya. He proposed the motion to the General Congress and it was unanimously rejected.
On 16th of February 2009, Gaddafi addressed the Libyan government, criticising them for corruption and demanding more direct redistribution of wealth. The Libyan guide proposed that the government be dismanted entirely and that all oil wealth be distributed evenly among the people.
That motion was rejected by the members of the General Congress who were the object of the Colonel's criticism and who are now trying to kill him, his family and everything that the country has achieved over the last 40 years. For example, Mahmoud Jabril, head of Libya's National Economic Development Board, which had recently been closed down due to corruption, and Abud Ajleil, the ex-justice minister, were staunchly opposed to Gaddafi's revolutionary plans.
To return to the BBC Paxman/Chomsky interview, when the BBC presenter asked "the greatest intellectual of our time" if he thought that a NATO intervention would 'bring democracy' to Libya, Chomsky replied " I don't think so".
Now, imagine that! Mr Chomsky, the guru of the left, doesn't THINK that a NATO intervention will bring 'democracy' to Libya; he's not SURE if a violent intervention by imperialism will 'protect' the Libyan people. Here's an except from the Paxman/Chomsky interview:
Paxman " we have an obligation, do we not, to behave responsibly"
Chomsky: "yes"
Paxman : "And you're saying that we should simply not get involved"
Chomsky: "there may come a time when it would make sense for the West to become involved, in spite of its horrendous record of atrocities and crimes in that region too going way back, but the question is has that time come?"
Chomsky and his cohorts never once questioned the avalanche of lies diffussed by the corporate media against the Libyan government, the FACT that its rebels were armed from the start by Western intelligence agencies working from Egypt.
The fact that the rebels attacked police and army headquarters, buring officers alive and mutilating their bodies, invading people's houses, raping and mutilating women, beheading their victims, lynching black people, indulging in cannibalism. All of this has been well documented, yet Chomsky has nothing to say about it. He calls Benghazi 'liberated' and only trusts the pronouncements of the 'world's best television service' the afore-mentioned station owned by the pro-US dictator of Qatar.
That Chomsky has been able to present himself as a serious leftist for many decades is indeed a tribute to his skills as a 'cognitive scientist'
Shortly thereafter, the leader of the "Irish anti-war movement" Jim Roche, echoed his master's voice by telling the Irish times that the NATO intervention in Libya was 'unlikely' to bring democracy and freedom. Many of these Africa-hating, Gaddafi-hating, Trotskyites tend to justify their hostility to Gaddafi by citing his raprochement with the West after 911.
Gaddafi certainly tried to make friends wih the west after the bombings in New York, but that was because 1 he knew that if he didn't they would invade and occupy his country 2 Gaddafi had also been fighing Al Qaeda in Libya for many years( they had been supported by Britain and the USA). During the 1990s, M-I6 ,working through a London Al Qaeda cell, attempted to assasinate the Libyan leader. Gaddafi knew all along what the real meaning of "al qaeda" was and he did not flinch from speaking his mind after he had established friendly relations with the West.
In an interview with Larry King of CNN on 28/9/2009, Gaddafi reminded the American presenter that the 911 terrorists had been trained in the United States and not in the caves of Afghanistan and that the occupation of that country was therefore wrong.
The notion, therefore, that Gaddafi was a puppet of the west is patently false.
Although 'friendship' with the west was costly for the Libyan people, it also enabled them to have the crippling sanctions lifted and Gaddafi was quick to use his new international 'friendship' with the West to criticise them all over the world. This was particularly evident in his speech to the UN on Sep 23th 2009. Have you read this speech "Irish anti-war movement"?
So, why did the west bomb Libya?
1 Libya was the richest, the most egalitarian and democratic society in Africa. They were setting a bad example to other African countries who serve Western interests.
2 Libya has the biggest oil reserves in Africa. Imperialism rather likes owning oil.
3 Gaddafi was resolutely opposed to Africom (you haven't heard of Africom "Irish Anti-War movement?" look it up!
4 Gaddafi opposed French president Nicholas Sarkozy's plan for the Union of the Mediterannean which would bring North Africa under the rule of the European Union.
5 Gaddafi wanted to create a counterweight in the world to NATO called the South Atlantic Treaty Organisation. He was working closely with Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez to achieve this so that poor countries would be able to protect their resources from Western pillage.
6 Gaddafi wanted to create the United States of Africa: one federal state with one powerful military to protect the continent from foreign domination.
7 Libya was investing heavily in education, health and telecommunications systems throughout Africa, financing Africa's first satelite system which became operational in 2007. It was thanks to Libya that Africa underwent a telecommunications revolution in recent years. Bad news for US and European corporations seeking to dominate the African market.
8 The Great Man Made River Project( have you ever heard of that my dear Trotksyites?). Bringing the water under the Sahara desert for thousands of kilometres to supply Libyan cities with fresh clean water, the Great Man Man River Project is, without question, the greatest humanitarian infrastructual project in the history of humanity.
The GMMRP was financed and built by Libyan money made from oil-sales after the West lifted the sanctions against them. But the ambitions of the Libyan government did not stop there;they hoped to become self-sufficient in agriculture by irrigating the desert, turning it into fertile arable land. Now there is nothing that irks Western GMO crop corporations than countries becoming self-sufficient in food. Not bad for a 'brutal dictator'eh Chomsky? One further point here: The CMMRP was built by Libyan engineers. When Gaddafi took power in 1969, there was not a single engineer in the illiterate land. Now, Libya has the higest literacy rate in Africa.
9 Gaddafi proposed a one-state solution for the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. Gaddafi's reasoning was simple. Palestinian arabs already work in Israel and the West Bank is split off from Gaza. It is impossible to construct a viable Palestinian state. The logical conclusion is therefore for the Israelis and Palestinians to live together in a democratic republic. Whites and blacks did not form separate states in South Africa, so why should Apartheid Israel be any different? Gaddafi has some experience in the politics of apartheid. It was in Tripoli in 1981 that the first pan-African conference on apartheid was held. Did you know that my dear Trotskyite 'socialist revolutionaries'? Chomsky HATES all talk of unity between the Palestinians and the Israelis. Chomsky is, of course, on his own admission a Zionist of the 'left wing' variety.
10 Libya had put billions of dollars aside to create an African Monetary Union and African Central Bank to free the continent once and for all from foreign debt slavery.
11 Libya has lots and lots of gold. So much gold in fact that it accounts for as much as half the UK's holdings, and the UK robbed most of the gold they could find during the 19th century. Gaddafi was getting a little worried about the value of those paper notes printed by the privately-owned Federal Reserve in New York which it uses to control the world economy. Gaddafi wanted Libyan oil to be paid for by a gold-backed dinar. This would have turned Libya and Africa into a superpower. Bad news for the resource-robbing West.
12 NATO, the EU and the USA do not like Muammar Gaddafi's model of direct democracy as it allows ordinary people to participate in running the country. Western paliamentary democracies serve the interests of the banks, corporations and financial elite. Gaddafi's vision of popular democracy is a threat to the interests of that financial elite in Africa.
While the corporate media have done everything in their power to present the uprisings in Tunisia and Egypt as 'revolutions', the real revolution began in 1969 in neighbouring Libya. The real revolutionaries of the 'Arab spring' are the millions of Libyans who have taken to the streets day after day to protect their freedoms; protect their free health care; free education; free housing; excellent childcare; modern infrastructure;their culture; their pride, their heroic history and the leader they love.
So did Gaddafi 'bomb his own people' Irish Anti-War movment? Did you read the report of the Russian military that proved this was a lie? Did you question any of the reports you heard? Were you not suspicious being as you are, 'revolutionary socialists' of the hysterical hatred Western imperialism has always had for Gaddafi even when they shook his hand? In France, the trotskyite Nouveau Parti Anticapitalite even had the gall to criticise Chavez and Castro for supporting Gaddafi.No wonder many people in france believe they were created by the French secret service!
So, "Irish Anti-War Movement" will you jump up and down calling for the overthrow of Hugo Chavez of Venezuela next when the Pentagon funds some pseudo-leftist outfit against him,( they already are, you know), when twitter, facebook and Al Jazeera start demonising him? Do you agree with your guru's estimation of Chavez that he is becoming a little 'authoritarian'? Your left-wing guru has already been working on softening your reaction to the coming attack on Venezuela, writing letters to Chavez pleading with him to release a corrupt judge and handing the anti-Chavez propaganda to mainstream newspapers.
Will we see the same response from you "Irish anti-war movement" next time your guru appears on the BBC as another 'popular' revolution in Venezuela is presented to you on your television screen followed by your guru's approuval? I suspect we will.
Finale
So, take a look at the pictures below from the television station of the 'GADDAFI REGIME', and tell me, did they make all this up? Can NATO bomb a country for 5 months every day, bombing and bombing and bombing and bombing, tell me can they do all of this and not kill a man, not kill a woman, not kill a child, not kill a baby, not kill many of them,not maim many of them, not terrorise many of them,not murder thousands of them, not diplace and terrorise thousands of them?
Can they do all this, tell me, without destroying the life and fabric of a country, you who jump up and down about Gaza, you who rant and rave about the West Bank, are the Libyan people different? Do they deserve to me massacred? you who shout about getting troops out of Shannon and "hands off Iran" and "free Palestine" and "fuck Israel" and 'revolutionary socialism', and "anti-captialism" and "anti-war" etc.etc. Why are you now BACKING the zionist thugs of Benghazi against a popular democratic regime?
You say 'fuck Israel' but you love the Israelite Bernard Henry Lévy and his rag-tag troop of terrorists and traitors, with their Israeli-made weapons. You say you want socialism then you denounce any country that actually attempts to implement it. So here you are now once again, you Monty Python leftists, singing in unision with imperialism as a sovereign nation is reduced to rubble, chaos and despair. Shame on all of you!
Since NATO began this war of aggression against Libya five months ago, under the fabricated pre-text of 'protecting civilians', they have failed to 'pacify' the North African nation. What is the reason for this failure? The reason is simple: Libya is one of the most democratic countries in the world and the Libyan people do not want to give up their hard-earned freedoms to be occupied by foreign powers and their corrupt domestic puppets of the so-called National Transitional Council.
The Great People's Socialist Libyan Arab Jamahirya is run by over 460 people's committees. There is no central government in Libya; rather,each resident of the country is a member of a local popular assembly. As Geoff Simons writes in his wonderful book 'Libya: the struggle for survival':
"The aim has been to sustain the sovereignty of individual Libyan citizens through the creation of popular assemblies(mutamarat) and committees(lijan; in such a system that the committee is pervasive at every political level and in every social sector.Every resident belongs to a sovereign popular assembly at the district level; members meet for an annual week of evening sessions to receive reports on local matters and to agree an agenda of important issues(such issues can range widely; from the relation between law and Islam to foreign aid, from policies on expatriates to economic development). The chairman and other mandated delegates carry the findings and conclusions of the meetings to the annual National Assemby which in turn takes its majority decisions to the secretariats"
The entire Libyan population is armed and the overwhelming majority of Libyans support the guide of the Libyan Green revolution Muammar Gaddafi. Now, you may not like the eccentric looking Libyan leader, dear reader, but the Libyan people do. There are no examples in human history of unpopular autocrats arming the entire population. Unpopular regimes never arm their subjects, for obvious reasons.
The NATO-backed rebels have never had popular support among the Libyan people. They are comprised mainly of the Libyan Islamic Fighting group, a rebel army formed by the CIA in Sudan during the 1970s when the country was ruled by CIA operative Gaafar Nimeiry. There is also CIA group, the National Front for the Salvation of Libya and other motley factions who would like to see a restoration of the British puppet Sanusi monarchy, and there is, of course,the ever nebulous international conspiracy called Al Qaeda. The city of Darnah in Eastern Libya has always been major recruiting ground for Islamist terrorists. One of the Al Qaeda leaders currently fighint NATO's war is Abu Sufian Ibhramhim Ammed Amuda bin Qumu. Bin Qumu was a former detainee in Guantanimo Bay. He was trained in the CIA-funded terrorist camps of Afghanistan during America's covert war against the Soviet Union. He was moved to Guantanimo Bay after the American invasion of Afghanistan and has now been deployed to Libya to fight against the Libyan republic. Other CIA/AL Qaeda operatives are Al Hasidi and Khalifa Hifter.
The 'rebels' of Benghazi have received extensive military support from the Qatar dictatorship as well as media cover and propaganda from the television station owned by the Emir of Qatar, Al Jazeera.
Working in conjunction with Western intelligence, Al Jazeera/Arabic and Al Jazeera/English have marketed themselves as 'independent' television stations. This marketing involved mild criticism of Israel and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
However, since the CIA-fomented war against the Libyan people and the covert war against Syria, Al Jazeera has been the most important asset of the Pentagon's information war.
Judging by the TOTAL silence of the so-called 'anti-war' groups, it would appear that Al Jazeera and the pentagon have won the war thus far. Although Al Jazeera have been caught lying over and over again about Libya and Syria, Trotskites and many other 'leftists' do not seem to have noticed.
The Irish trotskyites and their European counterparts are a good example of this unfathomable gullibility. These soi-disant'revolutionary socialist' and 'anti-capitalist' groups have backed the CIA contras in Benghazi against the popular democratic Jamahirya.
The utterly risible views of these groups emanate principally from such eminanet intellectual fraudsters as Gilbert Ashgar and Noam Chomsky. Both of these authors swallowed the lies of Al Jazeera, CNN and BBC hook, line and sinker and they've been joined by a chorus of prattling sycophants.
In an interview Noam Chomsky gave with the BBC on March 8th 2011 after the CIA-backed uprising, he called the Benghazi rebellion a 'popular revolution' and Al Jazeera was, he stessed, "one of the best news services in the world".
Unsurprisingly, that is also the view of US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton who recently praised the quality of debate on Al Jazeera and complained about news stations such as Russia Today that were winning the media war against U.S imperialism. So Chomsky and Hillary Clinton are in perfect agreement on the outstanding quality of Al Jazeera!
In the above-mentioned interview Chomsky gave to the BBC, the MIT professor and 'cognitive scientist' went on to call Muammar Gaddafi a 'brutal dictator'. Muammar Gaddafi left office in 1974. Since, then, he has held no official function in the country, other than a highly symbolic role as ideologue of the revolution; his high prestige and devotion to the green revolution have given Gaddafi enormous symbolic power, such that when he speaks for or to the nation, everyone listens. Have you read any of Gaddafi's speeches Mr. Chomsky? Or his Green Book? Obviously not.
Gaddafi is not a dictator. He does not have the powers to override decisions of the general congress. For example, many years ago, Gaddafi advocated abolishing the death penalty in Libya. He proposed the motion to the General Congress and it was unanimously rejected.
On 16th of February 2009, Gaddafi addressed the Libyan government, criticising them for corruption and demanding more direct redistribution of wealth. The Libyan guide proposed that the government be dismanted entirely and that all oil wealth be distributed evenly among the people.
That motion was rejected by the members of the General Congress who were the object of the Colonel's criticism and who are now trying to kill him, his family and everything that the country has achieved over the last 40 years. For example, Mahmoud Jabril, head of Libya's National Economic Development Board, which had recently been closed down due to corruption, and Abud Ajleil, the ex-justice minister, were staunchly opposed to Gaddafi's revolutionary plans.
To return to the BBC Paxman/Chomsky interview, when the BBC presenter asked "the greatest intellectual of our time" if he thought that a NATO intervention would 'bring democracy' to Libya, Chomsky replied " I don't think so".
Now, imagine that! Mr Chomsky, the guru of the left, doesn't THINK that a NATO intervention will bring 'democracy' to Libya; he's not SURE if a violent intervention by imperialism will 'protect' the Libyan people. Here's an except from the Paxman/Chomsky interview:
Paxman " we have an obligation, do we not, to behave responsibly"
Chomsky: "yes"
Paxman : "And you're saying that we should simply not get involved"
Chomsky: "there may come a time when it would make sense for the West to become involved, in spite of its horrendous record of atrocities and crimes in that region too going way back, but the question is has that time come?"
Chomsky and his cohorts never once questioned the avalanche of lies diffussed by the corporate media against the Libyan government, the FACT that its rebels were armed from the start by Western intelligence agencies working from Egypt.
The fact that the rebels attacked police and army headquarters, buring officers alive and mutilating their bodies, invading people's houses, raping and mutilating women, beheading their victims, lynching black people, indulging in cannibalism. All of this has been well documented, yet Chomsky has nothing to say about it. He calls Benghazi 'liberated' and only trusts the pronouncements of the 'world's best television service' the afore-mentioned station owned by the pro-US dictator of Qatar.
That Chomsky has been able to present himself as a serious leftist for many decades is indeed a tribute to his skills as a 'cognitive scientist'
Shortly thereafter, the leader of the "Irish anti-war movement" Jim Roche, echoed his master's voice by telling the Irish times that the NATO intervention in Libya was 'unlikely' to bring democracy and freedom. Many of these Africa-hating, Gaddafi-hating, Trotskyites tend to justify their hostility to Gaddafi by citing his raprochement with the West after 911.
Gaddafi certainly tried to make friends wih the west after the bombings in New York, but that was because 1 he knew that if he didn't they would invade and occupy his country 2 Gaddafi had also been fighing Al Qaeda in Libya for many years( they had been supported by Britain and the USA). During the 1990s, M-I6 ,working through a London Al Qaeda cell, attempted to assasinate the Libyan leader. Gaddafi knew all along what the real meaning of "al qaeda" was and he did not flinch from speaking his mind after he had established friendly relations with the West.
In an interview with Larry King of CNN on 28/9/2009, Gaddafi reminded the American presenter that the 911 terrorists had been trained in the United States and not in the caves of Afghanistan and that the occupation of that country was therefore wrong.
The notion, therefore, that Gaddafi was a puppet of the west is patently false.
Although 'friendship' with the west was costly for the Libyan people, it also enabled them to have the crippling sanctions lifted and Gaddafi was quick to use his new international 'friendship' with the West to criticise them all over the world. This was particularly evident in his speech to the UN on Sep 23th 2009. Have you read this speech "Irish anti-war movement"?
So, why did the west bomb Libya?
1 Libya was the richest, the most egalitarian and democratic society in Africa. They were setting a bad example to other African countries who serve Western interests.
2 Libya has the biggest oil reserves in Africa. Imperialism rather likes owning oil.
3 Gaddafi was resolutely opposed to Africom (you haven't heard of Africom "Irish Anti-War movement?" look it up!
4 Gaddafi opposed French president Nicholas Sarkozy's plan for the Union of the Mediterannean which would bring North Africa under the rule of the European Union.
5 Gaddafi wanted to create a counterweight in the world to NATO called the South Atlantic Treaty Organisation. He was working closely with Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez to achieve this so that poor countries would be able to protect their resources from Western pillage.
6 Gaddafi wanted to create the United States of Africa: one federal state with one powerful military to protect the continent from foreign domination.
7 Libya was investing heavily in education, health and telecommunications systems throughout Africa, financing Africa's first satelite system which became operational in 2007. It was thanks to Libya that Africa underwent a telecommunications revolution in recent years. Bad news for US and European corporations seeking to dominate the African market.
8 The Great Man Made River Project( have you ever heard of that my dear Trotksyites?). Bringing the water under the Sahara desert for thousands of kilometres to supply Libyan cities with fresh clean water, the Great Man Man River Project is, without question, the greatest humanitarian infrastructual project in the history of humanity.
The GMMRP was financed and built by Libyan money made from oil-sales after the West lifted the sanctions against them. But the ambitions of the Libyan government did not stop there;they hoped to become self-sufficient in agriculture by irrigating the desert, turning it into fertile arable land. Now there is nothing that irks Western GMO crop corporations than countries becoming self-sufficient in food. Not bad for a 'brutal dictator'eh Chomsky? One further point here: The CMMRP was built by Libyan engineers. When Gaddafi took power in 1969, there was not a single engineer in the illiterate land. Now, Libya has the higest literacy rate in Africa.
9 Gaddafi proposed a one-state solution for the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. Gaddafi's reasoning was simple. Palestinian arabs already work in Israel and the West Bank is split off from Gaza. It is impossible to construct a viable Palestinian state. The logical conclusion is therefore for the Israelis and Palestinians to live together in a democratic republic. Whites and blacks did not form separate states in South Africa, so why should Apartheid Israel be any different? Gaddafi has some experience in the politics of apartheid. It was in Tripoli in 1981 that the first pan-African conference on apartheid was held. Did you know that my dear Trotskyite 'socialist revolutionaries'? Chomsky HATES all talk of unity between the Palestinians and the Israelis. Chomsky is, of course, on his own admission a Zionist of the 'left wing' variety.
10 Libya had put billions of dollars aside to create an African Monetary Union and African Central Bank to free the continent once and for all from foreign debt slavery.
11 Libya has lots and lots of gold. So much gold in fact that it accounts for as much as half the UK's holdings, and the UK robbed most of the gold they could find during the 19th century. Gaddafi was getting a little worried about the value of those paper notes printed by the privately-owned Federal Reserve in New York which it uses to control the world economy. Gaddafi wanted Libyan oil to be paid for by a gold-backed dinar. This would have turned Libya and Africa into a superpower. Bad news for the resource-robbing West.
12 NATO, the EU and the USA do not like Muammar Gaddafi's model of direct democracy as it allows ordinary people to participate in running the country. Western paliamentary democracies serve the interests of the banks, corporations and financial elite. Gaddafi's vision of popular democracy is a threat to the interests of that financial elite in Africa.
While the corporate media have done everything in their power to present the uprisings in Tunisia and Egypt as 'revolutions', the real revolution began in 1969 in neighbouring Libya. The real revolutionaries of the 'Arab spring' are the millions of Libyans who have taken to the streets day after day to protect their freedoms; protect their free health care; free education; free housing; excellent childcare; modern infrastructure;their culture; their pride, their heroic history and the leader they love.
So did Gaddafi 'bomb his own people' Irish Anti-War movment? Did you read the report of the Russian military that proved this was a lie? Did you question any of the reports you heard? Were you not suspicious being as you are, 'revolutionary socialists' of the hysterical hatred Western imperialism has always had for Gaddafi even when they shook his hand? In France, the trotskyite Nouveau Parti Anticapitalite even had the gall to criticise Chavez and Castro for supporting Gaddafi.No wonder many people in france believe they were created by the French secret service!
So, "Irish Anti-War Movement" will you jump up and down calling for the overthrow of Hugo Chavez of Venezuela next when the Pentagon funds some pseudo-leftist outfit against him,( they already are, you know), when twitter, facebook and Al Jazeera start demonising him? Do you agree with your guru's estimation of Chavez that he is becoming a little 'authoritarian'? Your left-wing guru has already been working on softening your reaction to the coming attack on Venezuela, writing letters to Chavez pleading with him to release a corrupt judge and handing the anti-Chavez propaganda to mainstream newspapers.
Will we see the same response from you "Irish anti-war movement" next time your guru appears on the BBC as another 'popular' revolution in Venezuela is presented to you on your television screen followed by your guru's approuval? I suspect we will.
Finale
So, take a look at the pictures below from the television station of the 'GADDAFI REGIME', and tell me, did they make all this up? Can NATO bomb a country for 5 months every day, bombing and bombing and bombing and bombing, tell me can they do all of this and not kill a man, not kill a woman, not kill a child, not kill a baby, not kill many of them,not maim many of them, not terrorise many of them,not murder thousands of them, not diplace and terrorise thousands of them?
Can they do all this, tell me, without destroying the life and fabric of a country, you who jump up and down about Gaza, you who rant and rave about the West Bank, are the Libyan people different? Do they deserve to me massacred? you who shout about getting troops out of Shannon and "hands off Iran" and "free Palestine" and "fuck Israel" and 'revolutionary socialism', and "anti-captialism" and "anti-war" etc.etc. Why are you now BACKING the zionist thugs of Benghazi against a popular democratic regime?
You say 'fuck Israel' but you love the Israelite Bernard Henry Lévy and his rag-tag troop of terrorists and traitors, with their Israeli-made weapons. You say you want socialism then you denounce any country that actually attempts to implement it. So here you are now once again, you Monty Python leftists, singing in unision with imperialism as a sovereign nation is reduced to rubble, chaos and despair. Shame on all of you!
Monday, August 08, 2011
The Libyan resistance will win. No pasaran!
"How sweet will be the victory of the wretched, and how great! How sweet will the songs be on that golden day, and how brilliant the golden sun of the wretched as it blazes. How sweet this dangerous dream - that hopes will be realized, that wishes become true. That a dream will become reality, that the wretched of the earth will have their state." Muammar Gaddafi.
Sunday, August 07, 2011
The ongoing Zionist destruction of Syria
For the past five months, Syria has been the victim of armed gangs, emanating from Iraq, Lebanon,Jordon, Turkey and Israel. These islamist terrorists have been murdering protestors, army personnel and police. They have been committing heinous crimes against humanity, including rape, mutilation, canibalism and ritual human sacrifice. The terrorists are being coordinated by the notorious Muslim Brotherhood, who have had close links to British and American intelligence for many years.
The Wahabite terrorists are assets of Western intelligence agencies, who are providing logistic support, training, and an advanced disinformation campaign using social media in conjunction with global corporate television stations. Many of the psychopaths now terrorising the Syrian population have come from American military bases across the border in Iraq, where they have been trained.
All of this has been thoroughly documented by the Syrian authorities and independent journalists and researchers from various countries. Yet, the corporate media continues to publish lies and disinformation on a daily basis to prepare public opinion for 'humanitarian intervention' in Syria.
The French media is at the forefront of this information war with Zionist ideologues Bernard Henry Lévi and his minions pushing for more French military interventions in countries hostile to the interests of Tel Aviv.
Syria has been on the frontline of the resistance to U.S/Zionist imperialism for decades. Although it has many economic and governmental problems, Syria is a modern, secular democracy which provides its citizens with free health care, free education and strong protection and promotion of women's rights. In fact, Syria has been the home for thousands of refugees fleeing Zionist terror in Iraq and Palestine. Many Iraqis are treated free of charge in Syrian hospitals.
Syria does not recognise the state of Israel.It supports Palestinian liberation and is a strong advocate of a multi-polar world based on international law.
Unlike its corrupt Arabic neighbours, who have been capitulating to Israeli demands since 1948, Syria insists on the right of return for Palestinian refugees and the evacuation of all occupied- Arab lands by the zionist entity.
That is why the U.S, France,Uk and Israel, that is to say, the Atlantic Zionist Alliance wants to turn Syria into Iraq and wipe it off the face of the earth under the false banner of 'human rights' 'democracy' 'freedom' etc. Progressive intellectuals the world over know this, yet the vast majority of working people who read print journalism and watch programmed radio and television remain under the sophisticated perceptual grip of Zionist propaganda.
But the censorship and disinformation is most extreme in the Atlantic alliance countries as it is they who are now leading the drive towards world war. Readers of Russian, Spanish or Arabic tend to be more informed about these matters. For example, in Syria one has access to all media outlets, BBC, CNN, Al Jazeera, New York Times etc. Yet most Syrians trust their own national media channels.
However, Al Jazeera, Al Arabiya, and other sateline stations linked to US and British intelligence have had a corrosive impact on the minds of many Syrian youth. Many of the Syrian protestors are young people who have grown up watching Al Jazeera, the news station of the British/US-backed Qatari dictatorship. It should be said that not all of those protesting are engaging in such wanton violence. The CIA strategy in Syria is to infiltrate terrorists into the crowds, professional snipers who fire on the police and protestors. This creates confusion and chaos and makes it particularly difficult for the regime to mangage the situation. This is classic CIA destabilisation.
In fact, similar methods were used in the past. In 1989 in Romania, the CIA sent groups of terrorists into Timisoara to shoot on unarmed protestors. Bodies were taken from morgues, photographed en mass and presented to the media as proof that the Romanian leader was 'killing his own people'. In the video below, you can see exactly how this was achieved and the French and American intelligence officers are surprisingly honest about their role in training and directing terrorism against the people of Romania.
The true story of the Romanian counter-revolution was covered in Le Monde Diplomatique many years ago. They did not doubt then the truth about the role of US and French intelligence in the mass murder of Romanian civilians.But they are dead silent today as a much larger, more savage operation is underway against Libya and Syria.
Although AL Jazeera/English initially gained credibility for allowing more criticism of Israel, the Qatari newstation has played a key role in the Zionist destabilisation of Syria and the ongoing crimes against humanity being committed by the NATO terrorists against the Great Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahirya. They have actively encouraged the armed rebellion of the Sanusist, Salafist counter-revolutionaries of Benghazi against the Libyan government and have refused to air the views of the majority of the Libyan people who support Colonel Gaddafi.
In short, Al Jazeera represents the interests of the Qatari monarchy, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and their Western backers, Israel/UK/U.S.
Although false leftists such as Noam Chomsky, Robert Fisk and others are still clinging to Al Jazeera as a credible TV station, progressive humanity is resisting this final onslaught of Western imperialism, and there are less and less people reading the sophisticated disinformation of the above-mentioned fraudsters.
The video below is from Telesur, a Venezuelan television station. In Venezuela, the government supports independent media, while the corporate oligarchies control most of the mainstream press. The mainstream media in Venezuela is largely funded by US tax dollars taken from the American working class, in order to keep the interests of America's ruling class protected worldwide by shaping the opinions of millions of people. The mainstream media in Venezuela is violently anti-Chavez and pro-American. Such distain and open bias against the elected president of a nation would not be tolerated in any other country in the world.
The Venezuelan state-media is grass-roots and serves the interests of the general public. From my last trip to Venezuela, I can say that the working classes of that country are among the best informed in the world. One can have a far deeper conversation about international politics with a shopkeeper, or factory worker in Caracas than some of the most distinguished students and professors of our European universities. That is because they have a press which serves the public interest.
Since the start of the war against Libya and the covert war against Syria, Telesur have had reporters on the ground in both countries who have been reporting the truth on the atrocities committed by the NATO backed terrorists. In spite of over three months of war and horror in Libya and covert war against Syria, in spite of the overwhelming evidence that proves what these protests are about, the "Irish Anti-War movement" continues to support the NATO-backed contras in Libya and to denounce the government of Bashir-al-Assad in Syria.
These Monty-Python lefists are a credit to their historical lord and patron Leon Trotsky. As Lenin said of Trotsky "What a swine this Trotsky is — Left phrases and a bloc with the Right . . ! He ought to be exposed” (Lenin, CW #35 285)
The Irish 'left' are nothing but a foolish circus of petit-bourgeois Trotskyites, who are true to the anti-intellectual, anti-revolutionary antics of their historical heroes. Their bumptiousness and inspissated stupidity have turned them into a serious obstacle to a genuine people's peace movement.
Análisis de la situación en Siria par teleSUR_tv
Friday, August 05, 2011
Muammar Gaddafi. Guide of the Libyan revolution
MASSIVELY IMPORTANT SPEECH BY GADAFI SPEECH ON NASSER, ARAB NATIONALISM, TUNISIA & EGYPT
Qaddafi Mentions Importance of People's Conferences in July 23rd Speech
Posted: 2011/07/29
From: Mathaba
On the occasion of the birthday of Arab African hero Gamal Abdul Nasser of Egypt, the Libyan historic revolutionary leader gave a speech, the full text is translated here by Mathaba
Speech of Libyan leader Colonel Muammar Qaddafi on July 23rd, 2011, addressing the people of Egypt:
In the name of The God [Arabic: Allah], on the occasion of July 23, the anniversary of the historic July revolution. You do not need me to remind you of the July Revolution, which has proven correct all of what Abdul Nasser said, namely that reactionism was always an agent of colonialism. Reactionism is linked to backwardness and is not linked to progressiveness.
Reactionaries are always agents of colonialism, because the reactionary ruler cares for nothing but to stay in power. He knows that he has no links to the masses. He seeks help from foreigners, so he pursues policies that serve colonialism so that he stays in power. Thus the rulers of Libya before the revolution, the rulers of Egypt who were like rulers in the Gulf who seek help from foreign bases, the American and British forces, they placate Zionism to appease colonialism, they have no dignity.
All what Abdul Nasser said was right, all he said about revolution was correct. All he said about socialism was correct. All he said about colonialism was correct. Regardless of the military aspect of July 23 Revolution, the charismatic Abdul Nasser was able to transform the revolution or the coup into a revolution that rid the country of feudalism, exploitation and capitalism and above all evicted the foreign bases.
Then it took on a nationalist trend because Abdul Nasser realized that Egypt alone would not be able to liberate Palestine and even maintain its independence hence Abdul Nasser called for Arab Unity.
If the [Arab] nation had reacted to the call of Abdul Nasser, the Arab nation would have been by now a powerful respected nation like Iran, Turkey, India or Russia. All nationalities were embodied in a state: the Toranic nationality embodied in the Turkish state, the Persian one in an Iranian state, the Hindu one in India. Except the Arabs, as the Arab nationality was not embodied in one state, thus the Arabs remained feeble entities [small states], subordinated and sometimes stricken like now in Libya, Iraq, Palestine and Somalia.
[Political] parties in Egypt were the cause of the revolution. Read what Sadat had to write at the time about the Egyptian revolution and the [political] parties. Abdul Nasser was the one who said that he who becomes a member of a party was a traitor meaning that he entered in an alliance with a group of people who share the same regional or ethnic affiliation in which he compromises the interests of the whole society.
Parties were there in Egypt, but what had they accomplished: corruption, compromising Palestine and engagement in exploitation. Backwardness prevailed and that was the reason for the strong revolt. The parties were annulled when they became irrelevant and outdated and were replaced by the Socialist Union, a coalition of the working people who have an interest in the revolution, in freedom and progress. All these powers were allied together to lead the society without right or left or centre right or center left [political positions].
Then [along] came Sadat and to appease the West he abolished all what Abdul Nasser had done including and foremost the "Socialist Union", he brought back [political] parties, he talked a lot about parties though he earlier wrote about the Egyptian revolution criticizing political parties. The return of parties marked the end of the July 23 Revolution and from that time on Egypt returned to the situation that was before the revolution or even worse. Under Sadat and after him Egypt offered whatever the West asked to no avail, the subordination did not do Egypt any good, it did not solve Egypt's economic problems nor did it give it military power, it [even] ranked below Lebanon.
What has the revolution given? Revolution means people seize power, but how can the masses govern? This is the historic question that followed Athens [ancient greek experiment in direct democracy]. The answer is in the Green Book, it is that the people organize themselves into People's Conferences [Arabic: مؤتمر ], including all adults, men and women, and power becomes in their hands, and they then appoint People's Committees.
The People's Committees becomes responsible in front of the People's Conferences: the secretariats of the basic people's conferences and secretaries of the people's committees meet in an assembly called the "General People's Congress" [or National People's Congress], each person makes [his or her] decisions at the basic People's Conference and not his [or her mere] thoughts, and those decisions made by the masses of the basic People's Conferences from across the nation are brought [to the General People's Congress].
They formulate decisions in all conferences, in a single formulation that determines the policy of the country and what the people want, and the people's committees, which were appointed by the people, execute those decisions, and everything becomes for the people: wealth belongs to the people, arms belongs to the people and power belongs to the people, media belongs to the people, and not to a certain individual.
You have seen the problems in America now and in Britain, and you have those problems too and they are present in every country, everyone wants to have a big share in the media which is funded from abroad, foreign countries make a TV station in your country, a newspaper in your country and a political party in your country.
That is not Democracy, demo-cracy means people sitting on the chairs, the word cracy was taken from the Arabic language or the Persian language, which we have taken from them, the chair was mentioned in the Quran, the word cracy (chairs) could be Persian, people on the cracy(chairs), when all the people sit on the chairs then it is called demo-cracy, and when people don't sit on the chairs then it is not democracy, then it is called political party cracy, government cracy, classcracy, but not democracy.
Democracy means people on the cracy (chairs), so how can [all the] people sit on the chairs? People organize themselves into basicPeople's Conferences, all of them, as the political system passed [historically] through the following stages: the monarch stage - this is prior or after the rudimentary stage - the first stage being monarchy, the king emerged, a person emerges who could own the land and what's on it. This is monarchy. This ended, development ended it, it is no longer permissible for anyone to own the land and what's on it, only in the Persian Gulf, since it is not Arab.
The second stage was the republic (Arabic: Jumhuriyah), Jumhur - plusiyah - means people appoint a king, a president of the republic, who is [in fact] a king appointed by the people for a short or a long period of time, the same thing.
The important thing is that the second stage was the republic is when people began to select who governs them, and the republic continued. The republic has become dull and failed and the world is suffering [under this system] and the masses destroyed.
The third stage was the Jamahiriya, Jamahir (masses) came, sinceJamahir - plus iya - becomes Jamahiriya, the first Jumhur that became Jumhuriyah, and the second Jamahir which leads to Jamahiriya, and this is the final stage and the end of the road for the problem of power, the power becomes for the people, how?
It becomes the Jamahiri system with the basic people's conferences, the people's conferences appoint people's committees, the conferences decide and the committees execute [carry out the decisions], there is the popular security, there is the armed people, the people's control, and the inciting force we call it the revolutionary committees, or the movement of the revolutionary committees that incites the people to seize power until they practice authority.
Why did you take action that toppled Hosni Mubarak? Why? We were expecting the establishment of the Jamahiriya [self-governing masses society] whether in Tunisia or in Egypt, these are the people just as The Green Book calls for to seize power without weapons and without violence, just as the explanations of The Green Book indicate, that the masses reject the political system and stage a sit-in until the political system is toppled and they replace it.
This happened in Libya in the 1969 Revolution that was carried out by the army, and people heard that the monarchy political system was toppled, the government and representative council were cancelled and there was a void, people across Libya formed the people's conferences [ مؤتمر] on their own.
We anticipated that when you toppled the people [earlier this year, that you would] replace them with a popular revolution, establishment of the Jamahiri [direct participatory democracy] system, following the disruption and destruction which you have carried out. But to put in place another president, you might have done better keeping the previous president [Mubarak] until he had finished his term then elected another president without demonstrations or sit-ins in the Tahrir square.
What does that mean? Do you want to bring a super-president? Will he be better than Mubarak? As for Mubarak, he does not deserve this maltreatment. We should not be an ungrateful nation. As Machiavelli said Rome was not an ungrateful nation. When Roman commanders lost a war they were honoured, rewarded and sent into retirement.
Who will be loyal to Egypt after this end of Hosni Mubarak [of Egypt] or even Zine El Abidine [of Tunisia]? Who will be loyal to Egypt? Hosni Mubarak was exposing himself at risk to defend you, and to die for you. He was a pilot fighting Israeli forces that attacked Egypt. Instead of being honoured, he is insulted. Who will sacrifice more than Hosni Mubarak?
Hosni Mubarak went to sacrifice himself for you and your country before you were born. He has got just two children because he was a pilot and may die at any time in battle in defense of Egypt, so he decided to have only two children to be raised by their mother, while other Egyptians have got ten or more. Every Egyptian family consists of ten, twenty or fifty. The wife is as a school followed by a queue of children. Is it reasonable?
This is the end of who sacrifice for you. I know Hosni Mubarak. He is a poor man, modest and loves you. I know him. If he did not love you I would have attacked him and exposed him like other rulers. But I know him. He begged. He came to me and asked me for ferries, when the ferry sank. He went to Saudi Arabia to beg for other ferries. He also asked me and others for train locomotives.
Who will travel on these locomotives? Will he travel in them? They are for you. Sometimes we have no morals, just as when we insult (Nasser). Abdel Nasser a hero of the Arab nation; leader of the Arab nation; a great man who struggled against colonialism and Zionism; who dared and removed the royal system, and cancelled a mistake of (Bakri) and the Egyptian people, who have brought the revolution and appointed an Ottoman officer from Albania to govern Egypt as if there was no men in Egypt to rule the country.
They came with Muhammad Ali. Muhammad Ali's family ruled Egypt 150 years. The family owned the whole country till Egypt became a manor of Muhammad Ali because of this mistake. Then Nasser came and said ''this cannot be. It is nonsense. We, Egyptians, are we men to be ruled by an Albanian officer for 150-years generation after generation?!
Now, without plenty of space, military, economic and security power which country can live. The 53 African countries can't live. No one of them can face the storms of this age only when the African Union becomes as the U.S, the European Union, or the Russian Federation. A European big nuclear state cannot live alone, not Germany nor France nor Britain nor Italy, but only in the European Union.
For the United States of America, if it was independent states, it would have been as weak as South America.
The Russian Federation is present, China is a giant, and India is a nuclear state and exists. A billion of ASEAN now is formed in a new country. Latin America may become a union. The Arab States will be divided between Africa, Asia and will disappear, only if the one Arab country or strong African Union is established [can they survive]. Now, whoever does not have the military, economic and security power in a large strong space [bloc], cannot live.
It is not possible to live. Egypt's currency means nothing nor that of Libya, Tunisia or Malawi. What is the value of these currencies? Who knows them? You should have a power expressing a large space such as the euro, or dollar. You should have a military force to stand against big powers otherwise what has happened to Libya, Iraq, and Afghanistan will happen to you.
Who of you can defend Egypt? It is not possible. You cannot defend it. Have you got an intercontinental missile, an atomic bomb or an aircraft carrier? Without those, they will trample you as you are watching now.
In Libya, the Libyan people from Benghazi, Tubruq, or in Tripoli or anywhere else, there is no struggle for power, absolutely not, yesterday in the first month we met, we had no problem, we have no problems, we're practicing authority.
The Aggression is foreign, mercenaries made by France, the Arab Maghreb Al-Qaeda who escaped prison or who were expelled from the army. Each one took up arms and fought, not the Libyan people, here are the Libyans in the millions in the streets. In the end, I have 18 million Libyans, whom you call the Libyan tribes or the Arab tribes, who extend from Al-Minya to the desert to the west of Alexandria [in Egypt], forming a crescent until the Nile valley, we did not talk about these tribes during the Abdel Nasser era, they were third degree citizens, they had their own laws, they were Arab sheikhs and Arab tribes and they had their own system since Abdel Nasser, leader of the Arab world wanted to unite it and we did not speak.
During and after the Sadat era and due to our good relations with Hosni Mubarak, in the end we were embarrassed and never talked about them, but now enough! Everything has ended and each one is expressing himself in Egypt, we look at the Tahreer square there are 160 in a coalition, the Muslim brotherhood, libertines, our brother Coptics, nationalists and Egyptians all of them have entered [the coalition], everyone with a religious background has entered, hence the Libyan tribes, which include 18 million until now want to enter the arena, I, naturally, am afraid of them being marginalized again, and we will not accept for them to be third class citizens in Egypt, they cannot even join the army, or join politics or the army, they are marginalized, if Egypt was liberated by the popular revolution, these tribes, who are continuously calling me, should be accounted for, they cannot live marginalized from now on.
This is the era of the masses and each one wants to prove himself, naturally, we've Arab Bedouin tribes who are marginalized in Sinai and they are coherent with us in what's known as the grand Sahara tribes, naturally they tried to link themselves with us, however, I am talking about the Libyan tribes who are known by name, who part of them are in Libya and the other [part] are in Egypt, all of these tribes are an extension of the Libyan people. If Egypt is Egypt and Libya is Libya this matter should be clear, and if we're Arabs and want to be a single nation then this is another thing.
What's before us is an obscure situation, we don't know where are we heading, heading for division, disappearance, failed small states, dying nations then die. I am inviting you to meet with me, you who made the revolution in Egypt and in Tunisia, if it is a popular revolution then the people should seize power through the people's conferences and people's committees, if it were a prey and everyone wants a piece, then it is not a popular revolution! The era of the political parties has ended.
Now, it's the era of the masses, political parties should placed in museums as they are old tools, they are old moulds that cannot accommodate the facts of this era, the era of the masses, the era of the masses is the end of the road in the struggle for the people's authority, for democracy.
Democracy is people sitting on chairs, a Jamahiri system and not governmental, when one says a government in Libya they will laugh at him, this means an "antique", what's the government? Government means one governs and another who is being governed, this has no place in the era of the masses, no masses accept to be governed, they govern themselves.
No one can represent the masses, nor can anyone speak or think on behalf of another, they are there so let them think, talk, discuss and decide on their own in the people's conferences, the only mean to realizedirect popular democracy is the people's conferences [aka popular congresses] and people's committees. However, your people the Libyans are steadfast regardless of the ferocity of the attack, and you're watching, may God bless you.
We know the ordinary Egyptian individual's heart is burning and they are with us, as well as the Tunisians, and the all of the Arab world, we distinguish between rulers and the Arab people, today, we're defending the honor and dignity of the Arab world, and if we surrender, this means an insult to the Arab world. For the sake of Arab dignity, we'll not surrender, we'll die standing.
We're defending Africa, we're the gateway of Africa, we're the shield of Africa, all of Africa is behind us and with us, and the Islamic world is with us and defending Islam in front of the crusade declared by the French president, he said it, "I am leading a new crusade".
This is the second crusade, and I think it's shameful to sit and watch, counting the raids, how many raids and how many died and how many bombs were dropped on Libya. All of this will end, it will end and glory will be with the martyrs and freedom fighters, and for those who defend the Arab world, we're defending the Arab and Islamic worlds and defending the African continent.
I hope everyone would ponder these words, each one who listens and reads it one his own and not with a group, then a group comes and we will discuss it, each one should see whether these words are true or not, without any influence from anyone. I am with you, my beloved Egypt and my beloved Tunisia, I love Egypt and I hope that Egypt would not be ungrateful, and I don't want Egypt to be a failed country, on the contrary, I want it to be a leader country, now it went behind Tunisia and there is no harm, this means the leaders are the Tunisians and you followed them, however, there is no harm, even Tunisia is an Arab country.
I commend the soul of Jamal Abdel Nasser, hero of the Arab world in this day, I commend the Egyptian people. I commend the Egyptian youth, I hope that God may guide them to the path of the popular revolution and the people's authority.
Qaddafi Mentions Importance of People's Conferences in July 23rd Speech
Posted: 2011/07/29
From: Mathaba
On the occasion of the birthday of Arab African hero Gamal Abdul Nasser of Egypt, the Libyan historic revolutionary leader gave a speech, the full text is translated here by Mathaba
Speech of Libyan leader Colonel Muammar Qaddafi on July 23rd, 2011, addressing the people of Egypt:
In the name of The God [Arabic: Allah], on the occasion of July 23, the anniversary of the historic July revolution. You do not need me to remind you of the July Revolution, which has proven correct all of what Abdul Nasser said, namely that reactionism was always an agent of colonialism. Reactionism is linked to backwardness and is not linked to progressiveness.
Reactionaries are always agents of colonialism, because the reactionary ruler cares for nothing but to stay in power. He knows that he has no links to the masses. He seeks help from foreigners, so he pursues policies that serve colonialism so that he stays in power. Thus the rulers of Libya before the revolution, the rulers of Egypt who were like rulers in the Gulf who seek help from foreign bases, the American and British forces, they placate Zionism to appease colonialism, they have no dignity.
All what Abdul Nasser said was right, all he said about revolution was correct. All he said about socialism was correct. All he said about colonialism was correct. Regardless of the military aspect of July 23 Revolution, the charismatic Abdul Nasser was able to transform the revolution or the coup into a revolution that rid the country of feudalism, exploitation and capitalism and above all evicted the foreign bases.
Then it took on a nationalist trend because Abdul Nasser realized that Egypt alone would not be able to liberate Palestine and even maintain its independence hence Abdul Nasser called for Arab Unity.
If the [Arab] nation had reacted to the call of Abdul Nasser, the Arab nation would have been by now a powerful respected nation like Iran, Turkey, India or Russia. All nationalities were embodied in a state: the Toranic nationality embodied in the Turkish state, the Persian one in an Iranian state, the Hindu one in India. Except the Arabs, as the Arab nationality was not embodied in one state, thus the Arabs remained feeble entities [small states], subordinated and sometimes stricken like now in Libya, Iraq, Palestine and Somalia.
[Political] parties in Egypt were the cause of the revolution. Read what Sadat had to write at the time about the Egyptian revolution and the [political] parties. Abdul Nasser was the one who said that he who becomes a member of a party was a traitor meaning that he entered in an alliance with a group of people who share the same regional or ethnic affiliation in which he compromises the interests of the whole society.
Parties were there in Egypt, but what had they accomplished: corruption, compromising Palestine and engagement in exploitation. Backwardness prevailed and that was the reason for the strong revolt. The parties were annulled when they became irrelevant and outdated and were replaced by the Socialist Union, a coalition of the working people who have an interest in the revolution, in freedom and progress. All these powers were allied together to lead the society without right or left or centre right or center left [political positions].
Then [along] came Sadat and to appease the West he abolished all what Abdul Nasser had done including and foremost the "Socialist Union", he brought back [political] parties, he talked a lot about parties though he earlier wrote about the Egyptian revolution criticizing political parties. The return of parties marked the end of the July 23 Revolution and from that time on Egypt returned to the situation that was before the revolution or even worse. Under Sadat and after him Egypt offered whatever the West asked to no avail, the subordination did not do Egypt any good, it did not solve Egypt's economic problems nor did it give it military power, it [even] ranked below Lebanon.
What has the revolution given? Revolution means people seize power, but how can the masses govern? This is the historic question that followed Athens [ancient greek experiment in direct democracy]. The answer is in the Green Book, it is that the people organize themselves into People's Conferences [Arabic: مؤتمر ], including all adults, men and women, and power becomes in their hands, and they then appoint People's Committees.
The People's Committees becomes responsible in front of the People's Conferences: the secretariats of the basic people's conferences and secretaries of the people's committees meet in an assembly called the "General People's Congress" [or National People's Congress], each person makes [his or her] decisions at the basic People's Conference and not his [or her mere] thoughts, and those decisions made by the masses of the basic People's Conferences from across the nation are brought [to the General People's Congress].
They formulate decisions in all conferences, in a single formulation that determines the policy of the country and what the people want, and the people's committees, which were appointed by the people, execute those decisions, and everything becomes for the people: wealth belongs to the people, arms belongs to the people and power belongs to the people, media belongs to the people, and not to a certain individual.
You have seen the problems in America now and in Britain, and you have those problems too and they are present in every country, everyone wants to have a big share in the media which is funded from abroad, foreign countries make a TV station in your country, a newspaper in your country and a political party in your country.
That is not Democracy, demo-cracy means people sitting on the chairs, the word cracy was taken from the Arabic language or the Persian language, which we have taken from them, the chair was mentioned in the Quran, the word cracy (chairs) could be Persian, people on the cracy(chairs), when all the people sit on the chairs then it is called demo-cracy, and when people don't sit on the chairs then it is not democracy, then it is called political party cracy, government cracy, classcracy, but not democracy.
Democracy means people on the cracy (chairs), so how can [all the] people sit on the chairs? People organize themselves into basicPeople's Conferences, all of them, as the political system passed [historically] through the following stages: the monarch stage - this is prior or after the rudimentary stage - the first stage being monarchy, the king emerged, a person emerges who could own the land and what's on it. This is monarchy. This ended, development ended it, it is no longer permissible for anyone to own the land and what's on it, only in the Persian Gulf, since it is not Arab.
The second stage was the republic (Arabic: Jumhuriyah), Jumhur - plusiyah - means people appoint a king, a president of the republic, who is [in fact] a king appointed by the people for a short or a long period of time, the same thing.
The important thing is that the second stage was the republic is when people began to select who governs them, and the republic continued. The republic has become dull and failed and the world is suffering [under this system] and the masses destroyed.
The third stage was the Jamahiriya, Jamahir (masses) came, sinceJamahir - plus iya - becomes Jamahiriya, the first Jumhur that became Jumhuriyah, and the second Jamahir which leads to Jamahiriya, and this is the final stage and the end of the road for the problem of power, the power becomes for the people, how?
It becomes the Jamahiri system with the basic people's conferences, the people's conferences appoint people's committees, the conferences decide and the committees execute [carry out the decisions], there is the popular security, there is the armed people, the people's control, and the inciting force we call it the revolutionary committees, or the movement of the revolutionary committees that incites the people to seize power until they practice authority.
Why did you take action that toppled Hosni Mubarak? Why? We were expecting the establishment of the Jamahiriya [self-governing masses society] whether in Tunisia or in Egypt, these are the people just as The Green Book calls for to seize power without weapons and without violence, just as the explanations of The Green Book indicate, that the masses reject the political system and stage a sit-in until the political system is toppled and they replace it.
This happened in Libya in the 1969 Revolution that was carried out by the army, and people heard that the monarchy political system was toppled, the government and representative council were cancelled and there was a void, people across Libya formed the people's conferences [ مؤتمر] on their own.
We anticipated that when you toppled the people [earlier this year, that you would] replace them with a popular revolution, establishment of the Jamahiri [direct participatory democracy] system, following the disruption and destruction which you have carried out. But to put in place another president, you might have done better keeping the previous president [Mubarak] until he had finished his term then elected another president without demonstrations or sit-ins in the Tahrir square.
What does that mean? Do you want to bring a super-president? Will he be better than Mubarak? As for Mubarak, he does not deserve this maltreatment. We should not be an ungrateful nation. As Machiavelli said Rome was not an ungrateful nation. When Roman commanders lost a war they were honoured, rewarded and sent into retirement.
Who will be loyal to Egypt after this end of Hosni Mubarak [of Egypt] or even Zine El Abidine [of Tunisia]? Who will be loyal to Egypt? Hosni Mubarak was exposing himself at risk to defend you, and to die for you. He was a pilot fighting Israeli forces that attacked Egypt. Instead of being honoured, he is insulted. Who will sacrifice more than Hosni Mubarak?
Hosni Mubarak went to sacrifice himself for you and your country before you were born. He has got just two children because he was a pilot and may die at any time in battle in defense of Egypt, so he decided to have only two children to be raised by their mother, while other Egyptians have got ten or more. Every Egyptian family consists of ten, twenty or fifty. The wife is as a school followed by a queue of children. Is it reasonable?
This is the end of who sacrifice for you. I know Hosni Mubarak. He is a poor man, modest and loves you. I know him. If he did not love you I would have attacked him and exposed him like other rulers. But I know him. He begged. He came to me and asked me for ferries, when the ferry sank. He went to Saudi Arabia to beg for other ferries. He also asked me and others for train locomotives.
Who will travel on these locomotives? Will he travel in them? They are for you. Sometimes we have no morals, just as when we insult (Nasser). Abdel Nasser a hero of the Arab nation; leader of the Arab nation; a great man who struggled against colonialism and Zionism; who dared and removed the royal system, and cancelled a mistake of (Bakri) and the Egyptian people, who have brought the revolution and appointed an Ottoman officer from Albania to govern Egypt as if there was no men in Egypt to rule the country.
They came with Muhammad Ali. Muhammad Ali's family ruled Egypt 150 years. The family owned the whole country till Egypt became a manor of Muhammad Ali because of this mistake. Then Nasser came and said ''this cannot be. It is nonsense. We, Egyptians, are we men to be ruled by an Albanian officer for 150-years generation after generation?!
Now, without plenty of space, military, economic and security power which country can live. The 53 African countries can't live. No one of them can face the storms of this age only when the African Union becomes as the U.S, the European Union, or the Russian Federation. A European big nuclear state cannot live alone, not Germany nor France nor Britain nor Italy, but only in the European Union.
For the United States of America, if it was independent states, it would have been as weak as South America.
The Russian Federation is present, China is a giant, and India is a nuclear state and exists. A billion of ASEAN now is formed in a new country. Latin America may become a union. The Arab States will be divided between Africa, Asia and will disappear, only if the one Arab country or strong African Union is established [can they survive]. Now, whoever does not have the military, economic and security power in a large strong space [bloc], cannot live.
It is not possible to live. Egypt's currency means nothing nor that of Libya, Tunisia or Malawi. What is the value of these currencies? Who knows them? You should have a power expressing a large space such as the euro, or dollar. You should have a military force to stand against big powers otherwise what has happened to Libya, Iraq, and Afghanistan will happen to you.
Who of you can defend Egypt? It is not possible. You cannot defend it. Have you got an intercontinental missile, an atomic bomb or an aircraft carrier? Without those, they will trample you as you are watching now.
In Libya, the Libyan people from Benghazi, Tubruq, or in Tripoli or anywhere else, there is no struggle for power, absolutely not, yesterday in the first month we met, we had no problem, we have no problems, we're practicing authority.
The Aggression is foreign, mercenaries made by France, the Arab Maghreb Al-Qaeda who escaped prison or who were expelled from the army. Each one took up arms and fought, not the Libyan people, here are the Libyans in the millions in the streets. In the end, I have 18 million Libyans, whom you call the Libyan tribes or the Arab tribes, who extend from Al-Minya to the desert to the west of Alexandria [in Egypt], forming a crescent until the Nile valley, we did not talk about these tribes during the Abdel Nasser era, they were third degree citizens, they had their own laws, they were Arab sheikhs and Arab tribes and they had their own system since Abdel Nasser, leader of the Arab world wanted to unite it and we did not speak.
During and after the Sadat era and due to our good relations with Hosni Mubarak, in the end we were embarrassed and never talked about them, but now enough! Everything has ended and each one is expressing himself in Egypt, we look at the Tahreer square there are 160 in a coalition, the Muslim brotherhood, libertines, our brother Coptics, nationalists and Egyptians all of them have entered [the coalition], everyone with a religious background has entered, hence the Libyan tribes, which include 18 million until now want to enter the arena, I, naturally, am afraid of them being marginalized again, and we will not accept for them to be third class citizens in Egypt, they cannot even join the army, or join politics or the army, they are marginalized, if Egypt was liberated by the popular revolution, these tribes, who are continuously calling me, should be accounted for, they cannot live marginalized from now on.
This is the era of the masses and each one wants to prove himself, naturally, we've Arab Bedouin tribes who are marginalized in Sinai and they are coherent with us in what's known as the grand Sahara tribes, naturally they tried to link themselves with us, however, I am talking about the Libyan tribes who are known by name, who part of them are in Libya and the other [part] are in Egypt, all of these tribes are an extension of the Libyan people. If Egypt is Egypt and Libya is Libya this matter should be clear, and if we're Arabs and want to be a single nation then this is another thing.
What's before us is an obscure situation, we don't know where are we heading, heading for division, disappearance, failed small states, dying nations then die. I am inviting you to meet with me, you who made the revolution in Egypt and in Tunisia, if it is a popular revolution then the people should seize power through the people's conferences and people's committees, if it were a prey and everyone wants a piece, then it is not a popular revolution! The era of the political parties has ended.
Now, it's the era of the masses, political parties should placed in museums as they are old tools, they are old moulds that cannot accommodate the facts of this era, the era of the masses, the era of the masses is the end of the road in the struggle for the people's authority, for democracy.
Democracy is people sitting on chairs, a Jamahiri system and not governmental, when one says a government in Libya they will laugh at him, this means an "antique", what's the government? Government means one governs and another who is being governed, this has no place in the era of the masses, no masses accept to be governed, they govern themselves.
No one can represent the masses, nor can anyone speak or think on behalf of another, they are there so let them think, talk, discuss and decide on their own in the people's conferences, the only mean to realizedirect popular democracy is the people's conferences [aka popular congresses] and people's committees. However, your people the Libyans are steadfast regardless of the ferocity of the attack, and you're watching, may God bless you.
We know the ordinary Egyptian individual's heart is burning and they are with us, as well as the Tunisians, and the all of the Arab world, we distinguish between rulers and the Arab people, today, we're defending the honor and dignity of the Arab world, and if we surrender, this means an insult to the Arab world. For the sake of Arab dignity, we'll not surrender, we'll die standing.
We're defending Africa, we're the gateway of Africa, we're the shield of Africa, all of Africa is behind us and with us, and the Islamic world is with us and defending Islam in front of the crusade declared by the French president, he said it, "I am leading a new crusade".
This is the second crusade, and I think it's shameful to sit and watch, counting the raids, how many raids and how many died and how many bombs were dropped on Libya. All of this will end, it will end and glory will be with the martyrs and freedom fighters, and for those who defend the Arab world, we're defending the Arab and Islamic worlds and defending the African continent.
I hope everyone would ponder these words, each one who listens and reads it one his own and not with a group, then a group comes and we will discuss it, each one should see whether these words are true or not, without any influence from anyone. I am with you, my beloved Egypt and my beloved Tunisia, I love Egypt and I hope that Egypt would not be ungrateful, and I don't want Egypt to be a failed country, on the contrary, I want it to be a leader country, now it went behind Tunisia and there is no harm, this means the leaders are the Tunisians and you followed them, however, there is no harm, even Tunisia is an Arab country.
I commend the soul of Jamal Abdel Nasser, hero of the Arab world in this day, I commend the Egyptian people. I commend the Egyptian youth, I hope that God may guide them to the path of the popular revolution and the people's authority.
Thursday, March 31, 2011
Are Israel and the USA attempting to destabilise Syria?
As the global media cheers on NATO’s war on Libya, the media focus is increasing on the unrest in Syria. While the Western press is claiming that Syrian forces are ‘firing on their own people’, other reports would suggest that a complex nexus of subversion could also be at work to destabilise the Middle Eastern country.
Syria has been a staunch supporter of Palestinian liberation and was opposed to the American invasion of Iraq in 2003. Israel has occupied the part of Syrian territory called the Golan Heights since 1967, when up to 110 thousand Syrians were forced to leave their homes.
Syria has been in the firing line of US/Israeli imperialism for many decades. In 2003, the United States Congress passed the Syria Accountability and Lebanese Sovereignty Act (SALSRA), which threatened Syria with sanctions if it did not follow orders from Washington.
Section 2 of the act states
“1) On September 20, 2001, President George Bush stated at a joint session of Congress that `[e]very nation, in every region, now has a decision to make . . . [e]ither you are with us, or you are with the terrorists . . . [f]rom this day forward, any nation that continues to harbor or support terrorism will be regarded by the United States as a hostile regime'. [1]
On Friday March 11th 2011, Syrian state media revealed that the country’s security forces had seized a large quantity of fire arms, explosives, grenades and night-vision goggles coming from Iraq.
The Syrian authorities claimed that the weapons shipment was intended “for use in actions that affect Syria’s internal security and spread unrest and chaos”.[2]
On Saturday last, Syrian state television broadcasted confessions from foreign agents of different nationalities, after they were detained following violent clashes with Syrian police in several Syrian cities.
Mohammad Radwan 3 of dual US/Egyptian citizenship, currently working in Syria, was among those who confessed to having recently visited Israel for secret talks. The Egyptian claimed he had been given the mission of diffusing images and videos designed to create the impression that Syria was about to collapse in chaos.
The American citizen confessed to having been paid 100 Egyptian pounds but that he had not yet agreed the sum to be paid for the videos.
According to Venezuelan state-media Radio Del Sur:
“There are strong links between the Israeli and Colombian paramilitaries. In 2010, President Juan Manuel Santos, said he was "concerned" about the case of Yair Klein, a former Israeli military who travelled to Colombia to train Colombian paramilitary groups and performed "services" to the drug cartels.
As recognized by Santos himself, "Klein was one of the architects of that process led paramilitary after so much violence in Colombia."[3]
Similar confessions have been aired by Syrian state television before. In November 2008 confessions from an Islamic militant group linked to Al Qaeda believed by the Syrian authorities to have been financed by the current pro-Western Lebanese leader Saad Hariri were aired on Syrian state television. As the BBC reports:
“Speaking against the same black backdrop, the men admitted responsibility for the explosion, the aim of which, they said was to harm the Syrian government.
One aspect of the "confessions" may be particularly damaging, and may have wider regional implications.
According to the televised testimonies, the explosives used in the attack were brought from northern Lebanon, where Fatah al-Islam, it is claimed, received financial support from the party of the country's pro-Western Sunni leader Saad Hariri.” [4]
Contrary to the reports of the western media, the president of Syria Bashar Al Assad remains a popular figure due to his opposition to US/Israeli imperialism in the Middle East.
Hundreds of thousands of supporters demonstrated in favour of the Syrian president in Damascus on the 29th of March 2011 in support for president Assad after his cabinet resigned.
President Assad has promised to end the state of emergency in place since 1963 as well as implementing other reforms.[5]
Hundreds of Syrian communities abroad Greece, Bahrein, India, Russia and Belarus expressed their solidarity with the Syrian president. There were also demonstrations in the Lebanese city of Al-Nabatiya in support of the Syrian president.[6]
A peaceful ‘Day of Rage’ organised by opponents of the Syrian government on Facebook, was scheduled to take place in early February but protestors failed to show up.
The recent violence reported in several cities in Syria has received extensive coverage in the western press. But the circumstances of violence remain vague. It is not entirely clear whether peaceful protestors are being murdered by the police or the police are being murdered by the protestors. Some reports claim that 7 policemen have been murdered.[7]
What is clear, however, is that Israel has been lobbying for similar military action against Syria. After a meeting with his French counterpart Alain Juppé, Israeli foreign minister Avigdor Lieberman told Reuters News Agency:
“I think that the same principles, activities the Western world (has taken) in Libya ... I hope to see those regarding the Iranian regime and the Syrian regime.” [8]
Syrian authorities have accused the Israeli secret service Mossad of attempting to destabilise the country. Given the role of US, French and British intelligence agencies, backed by the international corporate media, in the destabilisation of Libya, President Assad’s claims that foreign mercenaries in the service of Israel are now attempting to destabilise Syria are highly credible.
[1] http://www.congress.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d108:H.R.1828:
[2] http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/mar/11/syria-seizes-arms-from-iraq
[3]http://laradiodelsur.com/?p=17449
[4] http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7715850.stm
[5]http://www.lorientlejour.com/category/Moyen+Orient+et+Monde/article/697247/Demonstration_de_force_des_pro-Assad.html
[6]http://www.sana.sy/eng/22/2011/03/29/339199.htm
[7] http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=24016
[8]http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/lieberman-west-should-deal-with-iran-and-syria-like-libya-1.351593?localLinksEnabled=false
Syria has been a staunch supporter of Palestinian liberation and was opposed to the American invasion of Iraq in 2003. Israel has occupied the part of Syrian territory called the Golan Heights since 1967, when up to 110 thousand Syrians were forced to leave their homes.
Syria has been in the firing line of US/Israeli imperialism for many decades. In 2003, the United States Congress passed the Syria Accountability and Lebanese Sovereignty Act (SALSRA), which threatened Syria with sanctions if it did not follow orders from Washington.
Section 2 of the act states
“1) On September 20, 2001, President George Bush stated at a joint session of Congress that `[e]very nation, in every region, now has a decision to make . . . [e]ither you are with us, or you are with the terrorists . . . [f]rom this day forward, any nation that continues to harbor or support terrorism will be regarded by the United States as a hostile regime'. [1]
On Friday March 11th 2011, Syrian state media revealed that the country’s security forces had seized a large quantity of fire arms, explosives, grenades and night-vision goggles coming from Iraq.
The Syrian authorities claimed that the weapons shipment was intended “for use in actions that affect Syria’s internal security and spread unrest and chaos”.[2]
On Saturday last, Syrian state television broadcasted confessions from foreign agents of different nationalities, after they were detained following violent clashes with Syrian police in several Syrian cities.
Mohammad Radwan 3 of dual US/Egyptian citizenship, currently working in Syria, was among those who confessed to having recently visited Israel for secret talks. The Egyptian claimed he had been given the mission of diffusing images and videos designed to create the impression that Syria was about to collapse in chaos.
The American citizen confessed to having been paid 100 Egyptian pounds but that he had not yet agreed the sum to be paid for the videos.
According to Venezuelan state-media Radio Del Sur:
“There are strong links between the Israeli and Colombian paramilitaries. In 2010, President Juan Manuel Santos, said he was "concerned" about the case of Yair Klein, a former Israeli military who travelled to Colombia to train Colombian paramilitary groups and performed "services" to the drug cartels.
As recognized by Santos himself, "Klein was one of the architects of that process led paramilitary after so much violence in Colombia."[3]
Similar confessions have been aired by Syrian state television before. In November 2008 confessions from an Islamic militant group linked to Al Qaeda believed by the Syrian authorities to have been financed by the current pro-Western Lebanese leader Saad Hariri were aired on Syrian state television. As the BBC reports:
“Speaking against the same black backdrop, the men admitted responsibility for the explosion, the aim of which, they said was to harm the Syrian government.
One aspect of the "confessions" may be particularly damaging, and may have wider regional implications.
According to the televised testimonies, the explosives used in the attack were brought from northern Lebanon, where Fatah al-Islam, it is claimed, received financial support from the party of the country's pro-Western Sunni leader Saad Hariri.” [4]
Contrary to the reports of the western media, the president of Syria Bashar Al Assad remains a popular figure due to his opposition to US/Israeli imperialism in the Middle East.
Hundreds of thousands of supporters demonstrated in favour of the Syrian president in Damascus on the 29th of March 2011 in support for president Assad after his cabinet resigned.
President Assad has promised to end the state of emergency in place since 1963 as well as implementing other reforms.[5]
Hundreds of Syrian communities abroad Greece, Bahrein, India, Russia and Belarus expressed their solidarity with the Syrian president. There were also demonstrations in the Lebanese city of Al-Nabatiya in support of the Syrian president.[6]
A peaceful ‘Day of Rage’ organised by opponents of the Syrian government on Facebook, was scheduled to take place in early February but protestors failed to show up.
The recent violence reported in several cities in Syria has received extensive coverage in the western press. But the circumstances of violence remain vague. It is not entirely clear whether peaceful protestors are being murdered by the police or the police are being murdered by the protestors. Some reports claim that 7 policemen have been murdered.[7]
What is clear, however, is that Israel has been lobbying for similar military action against Syria. After a meeting with his French counterpart Alain Juppé, Israeli foreign minister Avigdor Lieberman told Reuters News Agency:
“I think that the same principles, activities the Western world (has taken) in Libya ... I hope to see those regarding the Iranian regime and the Syrian regime.” [8]
Syrian authorities have accused the Israeli secret service Mossad of attempting to destabilise the country. Given the role of US, French and British intelligence agencies, backed by the international corporate media, in the destabilisation of Libya, President Assad’s claims that foreign mercenaries in the service of Israel are now attempting to destabilise Syria are highly credible.
[1] http://www.congress.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d108:H.R.1828:
[2] http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/mar/11/syria-seizes-arms-from-iraq
[3]http://laradiodelsur.com/?p=17449
[4] http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7715850.stm
[5]http://www.lorientlejour.com/category/Moyen+Orient+et+Monde/article/697247/Demonstration_de_force_des_pro-Assad.html
[6]http://www.sana.sy/eng/22/2011/03/29/339199.htm
[7] http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=24016
[8]http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/lieberman-west-should-deal-with-iran-and-syria-like-libya-1.351593?localLinksEnabled=false
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
