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”
http://journal-neo.org/2014/06/22/the-truth-of-libya-finally-goes-mainstream/
