2014-06-29
Total Blowout Expose: The Truth of Libya (Finally) Goes Mainstream
Vatic Note: With the findings of
this highly respected research and foreign affairs organization, the Belfer
Center for Science and Int'l Affairs at the Kennedy School of Government, we
get the most exposed view of so much.... such as
1. What really happened in Libya,
2. Who the players
were that created violence,
3. Confirmation of
the sold out MSM....
4. Exposure
of the UN's NGO's roles in the lie, scam, false flag, such as Amnesty
International and Human Rights Watch. Now that was a surprise to
me, but it should not have been, after all they are under the perview of the
UN, and that body is controlled by the British and they are controlled by
Rothschild.
5. But better
yet, this lists the internet alternative news sources that finally showed their
true colors and joined the MSM as being totally sold out to the power structure
and for me, that is the most valuable part of this below. I had always
suspected Al Jazeer and "Democracy Now", but this sealed it for
us. They are power structure disinformation sites. No more
credibility for them. They now join Newsmax in that unique distinction.
Its important that
we remember the brutal "MURDER" of Gaddafi, who was the leader of a
nation, supported by his people, and the foreign infiltrators of our government
and their dual citizens literally murdered him under false pretenses for
profit, control of resources and banking, and political gain, in other
words, empire building, which is a Nuremberg type death penalty
offense. Those psychopaths laughed at his death, which is proof of
a lack of humanity.
Its time we see
some action in a Nuremberg type trial, against those that did this below along
with prosecution of those in both the MSM press and the Alternative media, who
knew the facts and reported the lies as instructed and caused the military
actions that resulted from their reporting of the disinformation as
facts. Same with the NGO's.
The real reason Rothschilds minions, the
Israeli's, using our government's resources, through black ops, went after
Gadhaffi was because he was threatening ROTHSCHILD'S FIAT CURRENCY SCHEME IN
AFRICA and cutting into his profits and that was why he had to die. Same
with Tunisia and other ME African continent countries. The global
currency system is pegged to be the same fiat currency one that brought us
down.... or it will be gold backed with Rothschild stealing the world's gold
and hoarding it in China's 2,000 ton vault. Then he would control the
entire globes currency by controlling the gold.
This below is very good and gives me hope that
there is still someone out there that cares enough to do what is right and
these scholars who conducted this investigation have risked much to do
so.
The Truth of Libya
(Finally) Goes Mainstream
http://www.fourwinds10.net/siterun_data/government/war/news.php?q=1403703821
By Eric Draitser, Four Winds 10.com, June 22,
2014
More than three
years after the US and its NATO allies unleashed an “intervention” and regime
change in Libya, the US establishment admits they maybe have “got it wrong.”
Naturally, there were many of us who were demonized endlessly for speaking out
against that war, and against all those politicians, analysts, and “activists”
on the left and right, who championed the “humanitarianism” of waging war on
Libya.
We were attacked as
“soft on dictators,” “conspiracy theorists,” and “anti-Americans.” And yet,
today it is our voices that still proclaim loudly the immorality and illegality
of that war. Thankfully, it seems the establishment is beginning to hear us.
One of the
most highly regarded politico-academic institutions in the US – the Belfer
Center for Science and International Affairs at the Kennedy School of
Government at Harvard University – has issued a report which undermines the established narrative of the war in Libya,
laying bare the cold, hard reality of what Libya was at the outset of the war,
what really happened in the early days, and what Libya has become today.
Of course, responsibility for the tragic and
lasting effects of that war should be laid at the feet of Obama, Cameron,
Sarkozy, and the other participants, in addition to those media outlets and
NGOs that deliberately spread lies about the reality on the ground in Libya.
All must be held accountable.
Finally Seeing the Light?
The recent report, which is actually almost a year old, was
written by Dr. Alan Kuperman, Associate Professor of Public Affairs at the
University of Texas, Austin.
Dr. Kuperman attempts to shed
light on some of the key aspects of disinformation before and during the war in
Libya. These important findings contradict every single justification for that
war, from the lies and distortions of Samantha Power, Susan Rice, and Hillary
Clinton, to the deluge of propaganda from so-called NGOs such as Human rights
Watch and Amnesty International.
By
examining the obfuscations and outright lies told by these individuals and
organs of soft power, Dr. Kuperman makes it quite clear that, just as with
Iraq, the people of the United States (and much of the world) have been lied
into yet another war.
One of the
principal lies told about Libya and Gaddafi was the totally unsubstantiated
claim of “massacres” by Gaddafi forces in Benghazi and a few other cities. This
claim, perpetrated by Human Rights Watch among others, was repeated ad nauseam
by every major media outlet. As Dr. Kuperman writes:
Contrary to Western media reports, Qaddafi did not initiate
Libya’s violence by targeting peaceful protesters. The United Nations and
Amnesty International have documented that in all four Libyan cities initially
consumed by civil conflict in mid-February 2011—Benghazi, Al Bayda, Tripoli, and
Misurata—violence was actually initiated by the protesters.
The government responded to the rebels militarily but never
intentionally targeted civilians or resorted to “indiscriminate” force, as
Western media clai med. Early press accounts exaggerated the death toll by a
factor of ten, citing “more than 2,000 deaths” in Benghazi during the initial
days of the uprising, whereas Human Rights Watch (HRW) later documented
only 233 deaths across all of Libya in that period.
These are
indeed significant facts that merit further examination as they completely
contradict the standard narrative of the war in Libya and, most importantly,
the justifications for it. First and foremost is the question of who initiated
violence. The talking points in Western media all through early 2011 held that
Gaddafi was “murdering his own people,” and that this justified a humanitarian
intervention, to “help the people of Benghazi.” However, the hitherto
suppressed truth is that it was the violent “protesters” (who should rightly be
referred to as terrorists within the protests) who actually initiated the
violence, using protesters as human shields.
Secondly,
the notion that Gaddafi’s forces intentionally targeted civilians has been
thoroughly debunked. Quite the contrary, the evidence now shows that Gaddafi
went to great lengths to make sure that no civilians were harmed in the
counter-terrorism operation as can be evidenced by the fact that “Qaddafi avoided targeting civilians…HRW reports that of the 949
people wounded [in Misrata] in the rebellion’s initial seven weeks, only 30
were women or children, meaning that Qaddafi’s forces focused narrowly on
combatants.” Rather than ordering
the wanton killing of civilians, Gaddafi attempted to maintain discipline among
his forces such that they could stamp out insurgency with as little collateral
damage as possible.
Third is
the simple fact that all death tolls reported by the media leading up to the
war were not only inaccurate, but wildly exaggerated beyond the parameters of
“margin of error.” In fact, by overestimating the death toll by a factor of
ten, Human Rights Watch consciously played the part of public relations
clearinghouse for US-NATO. Of course, Human Rights Watch, long since understood
to be very cozy with the State Department, Pentagon and CIA, has become increasingly
discredited in the eyes of serious
human rights investigators and activists.
The role of HRW in Libya exposed the organization in ways it
had never been exposed before – as an organ of US (VN: International
Rothschild Israeli Khazar banker....) soft power projection, working tirelessly
to justify on humanitarian grounds what is undoubtedly a nakedly imperialist
war.
Dr.
Kuperman also points out another key aspect of the Western narrative which is a
complete fiction, namely that US-NATO’s goal in waging the war was not regime
change, but the protecting of civilians. As Kuperman writes:
The conventional
wisdom is also wrong in asserting that NATO’s main goal in Libya was to protect
civilians. Evidence reveals that NATO’s primary aim was to overthrow Qaddafi’s
regime, even at the expense of increasing the harm to Libyans.
NATO attacked Libyan forces indiscriminately, including some in
retreat and others in Qaddafi’s hometown of Sirte, where they posed no threat
to civilians. Moreover, NATO continued to aid the rebels even when they
repeatedly rejected government cease-fire offers that could have ended the
violence and spared civilians. Such military assistance included weapons,
training, and covert deployment of hundreds of troops from Qatar, eventually
enabling the rebels to capture and summarily execute Qaddafi and seize power in
October 2011.
Indeed, the US and its allies
abandoned the “protection of civilians” justification almost as soon as UNSC Resolution
1973 was passed, authorizing merely a No
Fly Zone in Libya which the NATO forces took as a de facto authorization for
total war. As Dr. Kuperman describes, NATO forces were clearly engaged in an
air war to destroy the military and political institutions of the Gaddafi
government, rather than simply protecting civilians and providing support to rebels.
Indeed, the NATO forces became the primary driver of the campaign against
Gaddafi, allowing the rebels to take territory and, I might add, carry out
their massacres of
civilians.
Even Human
Rights Watch, which vigorously suppressed the truth about ethnic cleansing
carried out against black Libyans while it was happening, was forced to admit
crimes against humanity in Libya, specifically the forced
displacement of the Tawergha ethnic group. Naturally, these revelations came much too late to
save the many innocent black Libyans, particularly in the Fezzan province, who
were slaughtered by the rebels backed by US-NATO.
Kuperman’s
report also highlights a number of other disastrous effects of the US-NATO war
on Libya, including the civil war in Mali, the proliferation of weapons to
terrorist groups throughout North Africa, and the general chaos and breakdown
of all political, economic, and social institutions in Libya. Additionally,
Kuperman notes that the US-NATO war prolonged significantly the war. He writes:
When NATO intervened in mid-March 2011, Qaddafi already had
regained control of most of Libya, while the rebels were retreating
rapidly toward Egypt. Thus, the conflict was about to end, barely six weeks
after it started, at a toll of about 1,000 dead, including soldiers, rebels,
and civilians caught in the crossfire. By intervening, NATO enabled the rebels
to resume their attack, which prolonged the war for another seven months and
caused at least 7,000 more deaths.
This is a
critical point to highlight. Even by the western investigation number of 7,000
– a gross underestimation in my view, the death toll is likely much higher –
the US-NATO war led directly to at least 6,000 additional deaths in Libya. Far
from “protecting civilians,” it seems US-NATO was too busy killing them.
While
noting some of the critical points, Kuperman’s report also leaves out a number
of other shameful outcomes of the war including the deliberate destruction of
critical infrastructure (including the Great Man Made River Project), the
oppression of women whose rights were protected under Gaddafi, the displacement
of many black Libyans and Africans from other neighboring countries who had
taken refuge and found employment in Gaddafi’s Libya, and many other deeply
troubling developments.
Who Should Pay?
Because
the entire narrative of the Libya war has been shown to be a fabrication of the
State Department, CIA, International Criminal Court, NGOs and other appendages
of US hard and soft power, the question of guilt and culpability comes into
play. The United States, along with its allies, has been howling for Saif
al-Islam Gaddafi, held illegally by the Zintan militia since 2011, to be taken
to the International Criminal Court to be tried for war crimes. Now that both
mainstream and non-mainstream, western and non-western sources have emerged to
challenge this narrative, it’s time we start asking who in the West should be
held to account.
First
among the criminals must be high-ranking officials in the Obama administration,
including former Secretary of State Hillary “We Came, We Saw, He Died” Clinton,
and President Obama himself. Not only have they, and their subordinates, blatantly
fabricated intelligence leading to an aggressive war (a crime against peace,
the most serious of the Nuremburg charges), they deliberately misled the world
as to the nature of their operation in Libya. Russia and China certainly feel
betrayed by the US and its lies in the UN Security Council. But this is merely
the tip of the iceberg.
What price
should be paid by media organizations and NGOs deliberately spreading
misinformation? Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International should face
serious investigations into criminal
negligence, or at least gross
misconduct, in terms of their dissemination of lies – lies which were used as
the prime justification for the war in terms of how it was sold to the people.
Is it a crime to inflate by 1000% casualty figures, the end result of which is
a justification for war? If not, it should be, as without such propaganda, the
war could never have been sold to the public.
Media
organizations, especially some ostensibly on the Left, should also be held to
account for their misinformation and disinformation. Democracy Now is at the
top of the list of guilty organizations. As Bruce Dixon, Managing Editor of
Black Agenda Report, wrote at the height of the war:
So like every other
Western reporter, Anjali Kamat [Democracy Now’s Libya correspondent] never saw
any “mercenaries,” just their oversized bullets. She never saw any mass graves
of the hundreds or thousands allegedly killed by Khadaffi’s “heavy machine gun
fire” either, or that would be on Democracy Now too. It’s not.
Nobody’s located the
thousands of wounded survivors either, that must have been the result of
shooting into crowds killing hundreds of people, and none of this has stopped
Democracy Now from carrying the story just like Fox News or CNN or
MSNBC…Something is really wrong with this picture.
We have to wonder whether, at least as far as the war in Libya
goes, whether Democracy Now is simply feeding us the line of corporate media,
the Pentagon and the State Department rather than fulfilling the role of
unembedded, independent journalists.
As Dixon
points out, Democracy Now exhibited at the very least poor journalistic
practice, and at worst, served as the left flank of the imperial propaganda
machine. By faithfully reporting the “facts”, which have now been utterly
discredited, Kamat and Democracy Now primed the pump of left progressive
support for “humanitarian” war.
Of course,
Democracy Now is not the only outlet that should be held responsible. All major
media in the US obviously toed the US line on Libya. So too did Al Jazeera, the
Qatari-owned news outlet which gained notoriety during the Bush years as a news
outlet hostile to US policy in Iraq.
However, by
the time of the war in Libya, Al Jazeera had purged its staff of anyone truly
critical of US foreign policy, particularly as it pertained to the “Arab
Spring” narrative. In fact, insiders have told me that a wave of
resignations, forced resignations,
and firings at Al Jazeera coincided with the refusal by some of the more
principled journalists to suppress the truth of what was happening in Libya. It
would seem then that, rather than reporting the news, Al Jazeera, like its
western counterparts, was more interested in serving power than challenging it.
In fact,
Al Jazeera was the first news organization to report, and repeat ad nauseam,
the lie that Gaddafi’s soldiers were systematically raping women in Benghazi,
and that they had been issued Viagra by their commanding officers. This claim,
repeated by Hillary Clinton, Susan Rice, UN Human Rights Commissioner Navi
Pillay, and many others has since been debunked, with absolutely zero evidence
ever surfacing to substantiate the allegation.
And yet,
it was one of the principal claims used to justify the indictment issued by
Luis Moreno-Ocampo as head of the International Criminal Court. This fact,
among many others, shows how the irresponsibility of Al Jazeera, and nearly
every other journalistic and human rights organization, led directly to the war
in Libya.
Sadly, it
is unlikely that any of the parties responsible for the criminal and shameful
war on Libya will ever be held to account for their crimes in a courtroom.
However, they can be held to account in the court of public opinion. Their
institutions must be discredited. Their names and faces must be known and
repeated the world over.
They all
share responsibility for the misery inflicted on the innocent people of Libya.
And we who have stood against this war from the beginning, we have been
vindicated. Unfortunately, there is no solace to be found in a Libyan
graveyard.
Eric
Draitser is an independent geopolitical analyst based in New York City, he is
the founder of StopImperialism.org and
OP-ed columnist for RT, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”
The article is reproduced in
accordance with Section 107 of title 17 of the Copyright Law
of the United States relating to fair-use and is for the purposes of criticism,
comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research.
http://vaticproject.blogspot.com/2014/06/total-blowout-expose-truth-of-libya.html
