Foreign interference in Libya will backfire

[Guest Adnan Darwash]

It was reported that the CIA and DIA agents entered Libya from Egypt to help preparing the uprising in Benghazi. This was followed by special-forces from Britain and foreign legionaires from France. Unlike the peaceful demonstrations against age-old ruthless dictators in other parts of the Arab world, the CIA-managed ‘revolution’ was heavily armed. During the attack on Gaddafi forces, foreign agents on the ground were directing US, French and British bombardment of ground targets. Gaddafi has been in power since September 1st, 1969 and it was high time for him to go. To have a genuine popular revolution/uprising against a ruthless dictator one expects blood to be shed. We have seen this in Tunisia, Egypt, Yemen, Bahrain, and recently in Syria. Eventually, the army will refuse to fire on the people and join the uprising. Many Libyan army units did this until the hijacking of the uprising by the Americans and their allies became public. The Arabs are absolutely convinced that the Americans will support, finance and arm anyone in order to shed Arab and Muslim blood. The rush to bombard Libya will have severe consequences. Like Saddam, Gaddafi was vehemently opposed to Al-Qaeda. Following the invasion of Iraq on March 20, 2003 and the killing of criminal Saddam, Al-Qaeda moved in. It will not be too long before Al-Qaeda men, who are already active in North Africa, find home in Libya ruled by American agents. The Americans should have learned the Iraqi lesson and stayed away instead of tarnishing and insulting the revolution. Some massacres of civilians may have taken place but in the long run, Gaddafi would have been forced to hand in power.

Adnan Darwash, Iraq Occupation Times

[Guest LINC]

The Transitional Interim National Council welcomes the UN Security Council resolution 1973 (2011), as well as the outcome of the Paris meeting held on 19th of March, 2011, and commends all efforts exerted to expedite the implementation of the resolution, especially with regards to the imposition of the No-Fly Zone and the aerial attacks against Qadhafi's brigades, which were approaching to enter the city of Benghazi and bombarding the city from all directions. The coalition aerial attacks prevented a genocide in the city, forced Qadhafi's brigades to retreat away from the city, and brought back tranquility in the hearts of innocent civilians who had initiated to move away from the city.

 

While the Council is surprised by the statements of some countries and figures who have criticized the use of force against Qadhafi's brigades which were bombarding the densely populated cities before the eyes of the international community, whereas Qadhfi is accusing the resolution with illegitimacy, confirming his non-compliance with it, threating to open armoires and transforming the Mediterranean region into a battle field, The Council affirms that the use of force by the international coalition was in accordance with paragraph 4 of the Security Council resolution referred to above which calls on all States to use all necessary measures to protect civilians. In this regard, the Council calls upon all States to bear their responsibilities towards the massacres perpetrated against the civilians, especially in the city of Misurata for bombarding all vital sites in the city as well as the intense bombardment of the city of Azzintan after cutting off all means of communications, water and electricity and preventing all humanitarians assistance for these two cities.

 

The Council warns the international community of the crimes perpetrated by the Qadhfi regime including the abduction of the bodies of those who have been killed by Qadhafi's brigades and shown to the media as causalities of the bombardment of the international forces in order to mislead the world, hence, the Council confirms that there were no casualties due to UN coalition bombing, as confirmed by medical source and eyewitnesses.

 

The Council reiterates its urgent appeal to the international community and all brotherly and friendly countries to carry out their responsibilities to break the siege and stop the Qadhafi's bombing against a number of Libyan cities, especially the cities of Misurata and AzZintan and to protect civilians in accordance with Article 4 of the Security Council resolution 1973.

 

The council derives it legitimacy from the decisions of local councils set up by the revolutionary people of Libya on the 17th of February. These local councils facilitated a mechanism to manage daily life in the liberated cities and villages. The council consists of thirty one members representing the various cities of Libya from the east to the west and from the north to the south. The aim of the Transitional National Council is to steer Libya during the interim period that will come after its complete liberation and the destruction of Gaddafi’s oppressive regime. It will guide the country to free elections and the establishment of a constitution for Libya.The Council members representing Al Buntan, Al Gubbah and Benghazi have been named while the names of those representing Ajdabiya, Zintan, Misratah, Nalut and Ghat have not been disclosed due to security reasons. The council is awaiting the nomination of representatives from the central and southern regions as well as Tripoli.

 

 

 

The Libyan Interim National Council

[Guest Hamsayeh.Net]

It was reported that the CIA and DIA agents entered Libya from Egypt to help preparing the uprising in Benghazi. This was followed by special-forces from Britain and foreign legionaires from France. Unlike the peaceful demonstrations against age-old ruthless dictators in other parts of the Arab world, the CIA-managed ‘revolution’ was heavily armed. During the attack on Gaddafi forces, foreign agents on the ground were directing US, French and British bombardment of ground targets. Gaddafi has been in power since September 1st, 1969 and it was high time for him to go. To have a genuine popular revolution/uprising against a ruthless dictator one expects blood to be shed. We have seen this in Tunisia, Egypt, Yemen, Bahrain, and recently in Syria. Eventually, the army will refuse to fire on the people and join the uprising. Many Libyan army units did this until the hijacking of the uprising by the Americans and their allies became public. The Arabs are absolutely convinced that the Americans will support, finance and arm anyone in order to shed Arab and Muslim blood. The rush to bombard Libya will have severe consequences. Like Saddam, Gaddafi was vehemently opposed to Al-Qaeda. Following the invasion of Iraq on March 20, 2003 and the killing of criminal Saddam, Al-Qaeda moved in. It will not be too long before Al-Qaeda men, who are already active in North Africa, find home in Libya ruled by American agents. The Americans should have learned the Iraqi lesson and stayed away instead of tarnishing and insulting the revolution. Some massacres of civilians may have taken place but in the long run, Gaddafi would have been forced to hand in power.

Adnan Darwash, Iraq Occupation Times

 

 

It is clear that the United States is providing modern weapons for the Libyan rebels through Saudi Arabia and across the Egyptian border with the active assistance of the Egyptian army and of the newly installed pro-US Egyptian military junta.

 

Al Qaeda was founded by the United States and the British during the struggle against the Soviets in Afghanistan. Many of its leaders, such as the reputed second-in-command Ayman Zawahiri and the current rising star Anwar Awlaki, are evidently double agents of MI-6 and/or the CIA.

 

The result of the present inquiry is that the Libyan branch of Al Qaeda represents a continuum with the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group centered in Darnah and Benghazi. The ethnic base of the Libyan Islamic fighting group is apparently to be found in the anti-Qaddafi Harabi tribe, the tribe which makes up the vast majority of the rebel council including the two dominant rebel leaders, Abdul Fatah Younis and Mustafa Abdul Jalil. The evidence thus suggests that the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, the elite of the Harabi tribe, and the rebel council supported by Obama all overlap for all practical purposes.

 

We are thus witnessing an attempt by the Harabi tribe to seize dominance over the 140 tribes of Libya. The Harabi are already practically hegemonic among the tribes of Cyrenaica. At the center of the Harabi Confederation is the Obeidat tribe, which is divided into 15 sub-tribes.23 All of this might be of purely academic ethnographic interest, were it not for the fact of the striking overlap between the Harabi tribe and the LIFG and al Qaeda.

 

Gerald A. Perreira of the Black Agenda Report writes the following about the theological division between Gaddafi and the neo-Senussi of northeast Libya, as well as other obscuranitsts: “Al Qaeda is in the Sahara on his borders and the International Union of Muslim Scholars is calling for [Qaddafi] to be tried in a court…. [Qaddafi] has questioned the Islam of the Muslim Brotherhood and Al Qaeda from a Quranic/theological perspective and is one of the few political leaders equipped to do so…. Benghazi has always been at the heart of counter-revolution in Libya, fostering reactionary Islamic movements such as the Wahhabis and Salafists. It is these people who founded the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group based in Benghazi which allies itself with Al Qaeda and who have, over the years, been responsible for the assassination of leading members of the Libyan revolutionary committees.

 

The Bush approach was to use the alleged presence of Al Qaeda as a reason for direct military attack. The Obama method is to use Al Qaeda to overthrow independent governments, and then either Balkanize and partition the countries in question, or else use them as kamikaze puppets against larger enemies like Russia, China, or Iran. This approach implies a more or less open fraternization with terrorist groups, which was signaled in a general way in Obamas famous Cairo speech of 2009. The links of the Obama campaign to the terrorist organizations deployed by the CIA against Russia were already a matter of public record three years ago.

 

On July 10, 2009, The London Daily Telegraph reported that the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group had split with Al Qaeda. This was when the United States had decided to de-emphasize the Iraq war, and also to prepare to use the Sunni Moslem Brotherhood and its Sunni Al Qaeda offshoot for the destabilization of the leading Arab states preparatory to turning them against Shiite Iran. Paul Cruikshank wrote at that time in the New York Daily News about one top LIFG honcho who wanted to dial back the relation to al Qaeda and the infamous Osama Bin Laden; this was “Noman Benotman, a former leader of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group. While mainstream Muslim leaders have long criticized Al Qaeda, these critics have the jihadist credentials to make their criticisms bite.”27 But by this time some LIFG bosses had moved up into al Qaeda: the London Daily Telegraph reported that senior Al Qaeda members Abu Yahya al-Libi and Abu Laith al-Libi were LIFG members. Around this time, Qaddafi released some LIFG fighters in an ill-advsided humanitarian gesture.

 

One of the fatal contradictions in the current State Department and CIA policy is that it aims at a cordial alliance with Al Qaeda killers in northeast Libya, at the very moment when the United States and NATO are mercilessly bombing the civilian northwest Pakistan in the name of a total war against Al Qaeda, and US and NATO forces are being killed by Al Qaeda guerrillas in that same Afghanistan-Pakistan theater of war.

[Guest Desert Rat]

You are stating that United States was once allied with Al-Qaeda, then we became enemies after September 11 attacks.

 

Now we are allied once again with the Libyan branch??? That is a hard pill to swallow. What I see is Iran is desperate to weave elaborate stories, because they are afraid that people are going to up-rise against them next.

[Guest tarheel]

LOL.

[Guest LAW]

This should give you a greater understanding of the current situation.

 

Remarks After the International Conference on the Libyan Crisis

 

Remarks

Hillary Rodham Clinton

Secretary of State

Foreign and Commonwealth Office

London, United Kingdom

March 29, 2011

 

SECRETARY CLINTON: All set? I apologize for my voice.

 

Good afternoon and I want to begin by expressing certainly our gratitude to the prime minister and the foreign secretary and the entire government for hosting this important conference. I’ve just concluded a very full day of business covering an array of issues with a broad range of counterparts.

 

I began the day with a meeting with Dr. Jibril and two other representatives of the Libyan Transitional National Council to hear their perspective on the situation in Libya. We talked about our efforts to protect civilians and to meet humanitarian needs and about the ongoing coalition military action in support of Resolution 1973. We also discussed the need for a political solution and transition in Libya, and I reiterated the support of the United States on behalf of President Obama for the legitimate aspirations of the Libyan people, and our commitment to helping them achieve those aspirations.

 

I also had the opportunity to meet with both Prime Minister Cameron and with Foreign Minister Hague. I expressed the United States’ gratitude for the critical leadership that the United Kingdom has shown in building an effective international response to the crisis in Libya. We consulted on the way forward, the military, political, and humanitarian dimensions. And we also discussed events and broader trends across the Middle East and North Africa and our joint efforts in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

 

I had the opportunity also to consult with a number of other counterparts about Libya because today’s conference is taking place at a moment of transition, as NATO takes over as leader of the coalition mission, a mission in which the United States will continue to play an active, supporting role. Some of our coalition partners announced additional support and contributions today, which we welcomed.

 

In addition to our joint military efforts, we discussed the need for progress in Libya along the three nonmilitary tracks: First, delivering humanitarian assistance; second, pressuring and isolating the Qadhafi regime through robust sanctions and other measures; and third, supporting efforts by Libyans to achieve the political changes that they are seeking.

 

We also agreed on a structure for decision making going forward on both the military and political tracks. On the military side, we agreed that the North Atlantic Council with coalition partners fully at the table will be the sole provider of executive direction for NATO operations, similar to the ISAF approach for Afghanistan. On the political side, we agreed to establish a contact group to offer a systematic coordination mechanism and broad political guidance on the full range of efforts under Resolutions 1970 and 1973. And as I’m sure you just heard from the prime minister of Qatar, Qatar has agreed to host the first meeting of the contact group, along with the UK.

 

In a series of side meetings, I also had the chance to discuss a number of issues, including Syria. I expressed our strong condemnation of the Syrian Government’s brutal repression of demonstrators, in particular the violence and killing of civilians in the hands of security forces. I also discussed efforts that are undertaken by the Organization of the Islamic Conference, particularly our joint effort to pass a resolution at the Human Rights Council that promotes tolerance and respect as well as free expression. And we greatly appreciate the OIC hosting a meeting of the International Contact Group on Afghanistan and Pakistan in Jeddah. I was also able to consult on a number of regional matters, including, of course, Libya with Foreign Minister Davutoglu of Turkey.

 

So it was a full day for all of us. We came to London to speak with one voice in support of a transition that leads to a brighter future for the Libyan people. I’m very pleased with the progress that we have made both today and in the days preceding it, and grateful for everyone who participated in the conference and in the broader effort in Libya. I think we are making a lot of progress together, and we could not do it unless we were representing the international community as we are.

 

So with that, I’d be happy to take your questions.

 

MODERATOR: Our first question is from Andy Quinn of Reuters.

 

QUESTION: Madam Secretary, in your meeting today with Dr. Jibril, I was wondering, were you able to make any concrete offers of assistance to them, either through turning over the $33 billion in Libyan funds that have been frozen in the United States, or in discussing possible arms transfers?

 

And Admiral Stavridis told the Senate today that intelligence shows flickers – he called – he used the word “flickers” of al-Qaida in the Libyan opposition. How great a concern is that? And is that part of the U.S. debate over any potential arms transfers to the transitional council?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, Andy, first of all, we have not made any decision about arming the rebels or providing any arms transfers, so there has not been any need to discuss that at this point. We did discuss nonlethal assistance. We discussed ways of trying to enable the Transition National Council to meet a lot of their financial needs and how we could do that through the international community given the challenges that sanctions pose but recognizing that they obviously are going to need funds to keep themselves going. We discussed a broad range of matters and certainly their presentation, which some of you may have seen earlier today, as to what kind of civil society and political structure they are trying to build in Libya are exactly in line with what they have consistently said were their goals. Their commitment to democracy and to a very robust engagement with people from across the spectrum of Libyans is, I think, appropriate. We do not have any specific information about specific individuals from any organization who are part of this, but of course, we’re still getting to know those who are leading the Transitional National Council. And that will be a process that continues.

 

MODERATOR: Our next question is from Sam Coates of the Times of London.

 

QUESTION: Two things. First of all, is it your understanding that the UN Resolution 1973 makes it illegal to supply arms to the Libyan rebels, or do you think there could be some room for maneuver of that should it get to that?

 

And secondly, it’s quite striking when the rebels were talking earlier today, none of their names are public apart from three or four of the 30-odd of them, and they clearly have access – they have quite a lot of power and access to a lot of funds through oil money. Do you think that they should be more transparent in terms of declaring who they are, where they’re from, what kind of groupings they come from, and how they’re using the money?

 

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, as to the first question, it is our interpretation that 1973 amended or overrode the absolute prohibition of arms to anyone in Libya so that there could be legitimate transfer of arms if a country were to choose to do that. As I said, we have not made that decision at this time.

 

Secondly, I do think that greater transparency will, of course, be expected and will be delivered. But I think you have to put this into context. I mean, this is a very fast-evolving, but by no means settled, structure that they are trying to build. They also claim to have a number of people who are willing to work with them from central and western Libya who, for security reasons, cannot yet be named.

 

So I do think that this is a work in progress. And just as with respect to Andy’s question, we don’t know as much as we would like to know and as much as we expect we will know. We’re picking up information. A lot of contact is going on, not only by our government but many governments that are part of the coalition. So we’re building an understanding, but at this time, obviously, it is, as I say, a work in progress.

 

MODERATOR: Jay Solomon of the Wall Street Journal.

 

QUESTION: Thank you. I have a question regarding Syria. Over the weekend, you gave an interview where you said how many members of Congress viewed President Asad as a reformer. Is that your position? Because you know there’s been well-documented cases of Syrian support for terrorist groups, allegations it’s pursued atomic weapons, and some in Congress said that Syria actually poses a greater threat to the United States – its national security – than Libya does. Is it the Obama Administration’s position now that it can work with President Asad to instigate or initiate some of the reforms that its people are clearly calling for? Thank you.

 

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, first, Jay, as you rightly pointed out, I referenced opinions of others. That was not speaking either for myself or for the Administration. We deplore the crackdown that is occurring in Syria and we call on Syria, as we have throughout the last months, to respect the rights of its citizens, to allow people to protest peacefully, to work toward political and economic reform that would be to the benefit of the Syrian people.

 

So there is no difference in how we view this than how we have viewed the other incredible sequence of actions that we’ve seen in North Africa and in the Middle East. And we hope that there is an opportunity for reform. We hope there’s an opportunity for reform in all of these countries. We want to see peaceful transitions. We want to see democracies that represent the will of the people.

 

So I think that we’re, like the Syrian people, waiting and watching to see what comes from the Syrian Government. They dismissed the cabinet today, which resigned en masse. And as we have said so many times before, we support the timely implementation of reforms that meet the demands that Syrians are presenting to their government, such as immediately eliminating Syria’s state of emergency laws, which has been in effect for a long time.

 

It is up to the Syrian Government, it is up to the leadership, starting with President Bashir Asad, to prove that it can be responsive to the needs of its own people. So we’re troubled by what we hear, but we’re also going to continue to urge that the promise of reform, which has been made over and over again and which you reported on just a few months ago – I’m a reformer, I’m going to reform, and I’ve talked to members of Congress and others about that, that we hear from the highest levels of leadership in Syria – will actually be turned into reality. That’s what we’re waiting and watching for.

 

MODERATOR: And the final question from Duncan Gardham of the Daily Telegraph.

 

QUESTION: Hi, I wondered how you view the situation in Libya at the moment. There seems to be a bit of almost ping-pong going on. The rebels seem to be withdrawing from some areas today. How do you see the situation evolving in Libya? How long do you see it lasting? And if you’re talking to Qadhafi, what are his options? He can obviously try and stay or he can face the ICC, but is there a third option where he could travel to another country?

 

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, first, I think that what we are seeing in Libya is a strengthening of the opposition, a consistent and very persistent effort by the opposition to try to hold ground which they have had and to regain ground which they have lost. Unfortunately, we are also seeing with Qadhafi a continuing pressure on the rebels, on his people, a willingness to use force. We had reports today of continuing military action by Qadhafi’s forces in Misrata and elsewhere. So this is a volatile, dynamic situation that is unfolding.

 

We accomplished a lot in a very short period of time. We clearly believe, as President Obama said last night, that we prevented a massacre in Benghazi, that we were able to stop the military advance that was moving rapidly from west to east, and that we sent a clear message through the international community’s willingness to enforce a no-fly zone and protect civilians that that kind of ruthless behavior by a leader toward his own people would not be tolerated. This has happened so quickly that we’re now facing questions like the ones you ask, but I’m not sure that we know exactly when we will get to any change in attitude by Qadhafi and those around him.

 

As you know, there’s a lot of reaching out that is occurring, a lot of conversations that are going on, and as the Arab League has said, it’s also obvious to everyone that Qadhafi has lost the legitimacy to lead. So we believe he must go. We’re working with the international community to try to achieve that outcome. He will have to make a decision. And that decision, so far as we’re aware, has not yet been made.

 

You probably know that the secretary general’s special envoy will be going to Tripoli and Benghazi, once again to urge Qadhafi to implement a real ceasefire that is not going to be immediately breached by his own forces, to withdraw from those areas that he has taken by force, and to look for a political resolution, which could include his leaving the country. So, I mean, all of this is in play. And many of the nations that were here in London today are working together to try to gather information, to share the impressions each has with the conversations that are coming from Tripoli and from those close to Qadhafi about what is or isn’t being considered.

 

So I expect to see things continue to move in a positive direction. But I can’t by any means give you any sort of timeline. That is just not sensible at this point. We don’t have enough information to do that.

 

MODERATOR: Thank you all very much.

[Guest JTC]

Under Operation Unified Protector, NATO ships, submarines and jets are cutting the flow of arms and mercenaries to Gaddafi’s forces.

 

NATO pilots and controllers will do everything they can to deny the Gaddafi regime any use of air power and they will do so with care and precision to avoid harming the people of Libya.

 

The direction of NATO military operations is the responsibility of the North Atlantic Council. Joint Forces Command Naples will command the operation.

 

How is this done? First is that you have to establish a good situational awareness of the area for which you are responsible and at this time it is particular focus on the coastal region of Libya. NATO is there to discourage, deter and prevent all forces from conducting air operations unless specifically authorized. At this stage that NFZs are impartial. There is no one authorized to fly within that zone. It is not necessarily pro-Ghadaffi or anti-Ghadaffi forces. It is the impartial enforcement in line with the UNSCR of a NFZ, except for those missions that are authorized.

 

NATO ambassadors have decided to actively consider taking over the full UN mandate. All 28 allies have to reach consensus. Command and control of NATO military operations of course is NATO’s business.

 

NFZs are resource intensive if you are going to do this 24 hours a day, 7 days a week it requires dozens of aircraft and supporting assets. Composition is at least 2 AWACS, 2 KC135 to refuel and protection of the tankers and AWACS with pilots and fighters. On top of that there will and there will be other surveillance assets to produce effective intelligence pictures of what is going on within the area. Then you have the fighter aircraft that will combat patrol in communication with the AWACS, and they will react to anything that then comes into the airspace.

 

Rules of Engagement are in place of that; everybody operates within a right of self defence That’s a fundamental rule of engagement for all operations. So if they are directly targeted, the crews are able to act in self defence. If however, they are just threatened then there are Rules of Engagement that allow you to report that back through the Chain of Command and react to those as required.. Sorry was there a final point to the question?

 

In addition, there is no delineation between high or low altitude missions, reaction and response depends upon the environment of which the aircraft comes. If it is something that is flying through the airspace at medium to high level and appears to be a civil airliner then that is not something that is an immediate threat to people on the ground. So you respond accordingly to that and would take action to get the aircraft to leave the airspace. If its an attack helicopter at low level that appears to be already firing on somebody then you react accordingly.

 

The NFZ is established over the entire area of Libya. The focus particularly on situational awareness initially has been on the coastal regions because that is where the, effectively militarily, that is where the concentration forces are, so that is where you need to know specifically what is going on. As for the embargo area the NFZ is complimentary to the embargo but the NFZ specifically cover the airspace over Libya.

 

The Nato Secretary General has had and continues to have contacts with Arab leaders from the region. They welcome NATO’s contribution. These are long established valued partners and they have experience of working with NATO and NATO will fully include contributing partners from Arab countries, from other nations in its deliberations. This is part of the broad international effort to support the people of Libya.

[Guest wiki]

Libyan leader Colonel Muammar Gaddafi launched an offensive Tuesday and managed to push rebel forces out of the town of Bin Jawad. This comes as world powers met the same day to discuss the future of the country.

 

Rebels disclosed that their troops in Bin Jawad came under heavy artillery and rocket fire, after which they made a hasty retreat. Rebels who were still in the open desert sought cover and fired at Gaddafi troops as they appeared. One rebel warrior said that the shelling was too much for them to handle, A rebel fighter, Ashraf Mohammed, was quoted by Reuters as saying, "[t]he Gaddafi guys hit us with Grads [rockets] and they came round our flanks."

 

Rebel forces retreated to the city of Ras Lanuf, which they had captured days before on Sunday, where they recuperated. However, they were not completely safe there as they came under heavy gunfire at the western fringe of town and had to defend themselves with any weapons that they could find.

 

Civilians also retreated from the war zone. One man criticized rebel troops, telling them too "[g]et yourselves up there and stop posing for pictures."

 

Today's battle marked a shift of momentum in favour of government troops; earlier this week rebels held the advantage over pro-Gaddafi forces as they made their westward march with little to no resistance.

[Guest Patrick Martin]

It has been six days since Khalifa Hifter was appointed the top military commander for the Libyan rebel forces fighting the regime of Muammar Gaddafi. His appointment was noted by reporter Nancy Youssef of McClatchy Newspapers, a US regional chain that includes the Sacramento Bee and the Kansas City Star.

 

Two days later, another McClatchy journalist, Chris Adams, wrote a brief biographical sketch of Hifter that left the implication, without saying so explicitly, that he was a longtime CIA asset. It headlined the fact that after defecting from a top position in Gaddafi’s army, Hifter had lived in northern Virginia for some 20 years, as well as noting that Hifter had no obvious means of financial support.

 

Hifter has been interviewed and his appointment reported by the European press, including the Independent of Britain, the German weekly Stern, and newspapers in Spain, France, Italy and Turkey (with variant spellings, including Heftar and Haftar). But not in America.

 

Hifter’s name has not appeared in the bulk of the corporate-controlled US media. The New York Times, the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal, the Los Angeles Times have all been curiously silent, despite having more journalists in the war zone than McClatchy. The US television networks have likewise kept quiet on the identity of the Libyan rebel commander, with the exception of a brief interview with Hifter on ABC News March 27, which made no reference to his previous long-term residence within five miles of CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia.

 

There is no credible explanation for this silence from the standpoint of journalism. There is no security reason to keep the name of the Libyan commander secret—it was publicly announced by the Transitional National Council in Benghazi, and Hifter is certainly well known to Gaddafi, who employed him as a commander of Libyan-backed forces in the civil wars in Chad in the 1980s.

 

The obvious conclusion is that the American media is keeping silent in order to deprive the American people of information that would help clarify the nature of the US military intervention in Libya—and trigger opposition to it. The selection of a longtime CIA collaborator as commander of the rebels makes nonsense of the official claim that the United States is intervening militarily in Libya to protect civilian lives, rather than taking sides in a civil war in order to gain control of Libya’s oil assets and strengthen the position of American imperialism in the region.

 

Two words that were notably absent from Obama’s Monday night speech on national television were “rebels” and “CIA.” Both the Obama administration and the US intelligence apparatus want to downplay their role in the direction of the rebel ground forces. For the American media, that amounts to a direct order, to which the editors of the Times, Post, etc., salute and say, “Yes, sir, Mr. President.”

 

Only two months ago, Times editor Bill Keller penned a lengthy screed against WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange in the newspaper’s Sunday magazine section. In the course of his denunciation of a genuine journalist, this courtier of the American state declared that the role of “an independent news organization” was “to exercise responsible judgment about what to publish and what not to publish …” (See “The New York Times’ Bill Keller on WikiLeaks: A collapse of democratic sensibility”)

 

In the case of Khalifa Hifter, this responsibility “not to publish” extends beyond the concealment of the documentary evidence of American war crimes and diplomatic conspiracies uncovered by WikiLeaks. The American media is withholding from the American public basic facts about the war in Libya, widely reported overseas and easily available to those who know where to look. There is no other word for this but censorship.

[Guest JohnnyMorales]

Oh the skeptics cause me such heartfelt pain.

 

Didn't some of our most revered revolutionary forefathers come from Virginia.

 

Just what is so odd and unusual about Libyan revolutionaries being "born" spiritually in the same place.

 

The fact that the CIA is also in suburban DC is besides the point, and in any case if they did help in the birth of the spirit of Libyan freedom it was a good thing.

 

Ultimately the people of Libya will thank us and shower Americans with rose petals when this is all over.

[Guest x]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TncgsS0FDWg

Russian military states that Gaddafi air strikes against its citizens in Libya never took place.

[Guest Desert Rat]

If all above is true then why would Russia concur that NATO’s decision to head up the operation in Libya is in line with UN resolution 1973, which was passed by the Security Council on March 17.

 

As a permanent member of the Council, Russia had the power to veto to the resolution, which authorizes "all necessary measures to enforce compliance" with the no-fly zones, but chose to abstain.

 

Looks like Russia is upset that they are not part of the strike force. Too bad. NATO could use them as well.

[Guest Adnan Darwash]

The Transitional Interim National Council welcomes the UN Security Council resolution 1973 (2011), as well as the outcome of the Paris meeting held on 19th of March, 2011, and commends all efforts exerted to expedite the implementation of the resolution, especially with regards to the imposition of the No-Fly Zone and the aerial attacks against Qadhafi's brigades, which were approaching to enter the city of Benghazi and bombarding the city from all directions. The coalition aerial attacks prevented a genocide in the city, forced Qadhafi's brigades to retreat away from the city, and brought back tranquility in the hearts of innocent civilians who had initiated to move away from the city.

 

While the Council is surprised by the statements of some countries and figures who have criticized the use of force against Qadhafi's brigades which were bombarding the densely populated cities before the eyes of the international community, whereas Qadhfi is accusing the resolution with illegitimacy, confirming his non-compliance with it, threating to open armoires and transforming the Mediterranean region into a battle field, The Council affirms that the use of force by the international coalition was in accordance with paragraph 4 of the Security Council resolution referred to above which calls on all States to use all necessary measures to protect civilians. In this regard, the Council calls upon all States to bear their responsibilities towards the massacres perpetrated against the civilians, especially in the city of Misurata for bombarding all vital sites in the city as well as the intense bombardment of the city of Azzintan after cutting off all means of communications, water and electricity and preventing all humanitarians assistance for these two cities.

 

The Council warns the international community of the crimes perpetrated by the Qadhfi regime including the abduction of the bodies of those who have been killed by Qadhafi's brigades and shown to the media as causalities of the bombardment of the international forces in order to mislead the world, hence, the Council confirms that there were no casualties due to UN coalition bombing, as confirmed by medical source and eyewitnesses.

 

The Council reiterates its urgent appeal to the international community and all brotherly and friendly countries to carry out their responsibilities to break the siege and stop the Qadhafi's bombing against a number of Libyan cities, especially the cities of Misurata and AzZintan and to protect civilians in accordance with Article 4 of the Security Council resolution 1973.

 

The council derives it legitimacy from the decisions of local councils set up by the revolutionary people of Libya on the 17th of February. These local councils facilitated a mechanism to manage daily life in the liberated cities and villages. The council consists of thirty one members representing the various cities of Libya from the east to the west and from the north to the south. The aim of the Transitional National Council is to steer Libya during the interim period that will come after its complete liberation and the destruction of Gaddafi’s oppressive regime. It will guide the country to free elections and the establishment of a constitution for Libya.The Council members representing Al Buntan, Al Gubbah and Benghazi have been named while the names of those representing Ajdabiya, Zintan, Misratah, Nalut and Ghat have not been disclosed due to security reasons. The council is awaiting the nomination of representatives from the central and southern regions as well as Tripoli.

 

 

 

The Libyan Interim National Council

 

To the Libyan Interim Council: With US support you lose if even if you win!

All those who have entered Baghdad behind American tanks to topple despot Saddam, are currently isolated inside the heavily protected Green Zone. In Afghanistan, Hameed Kharzai Republic is limited one sqaure mile inside Kabul. The likes of Dr Allawi, Talibani and Dr Al-Chalabi are the most hated in Iraq and travel guarded by scores of mercenaries. The president of Iraq hasn´t travelled to see the South, West or East of the country despite serving two terms in US-occupied Iraq. I expect the same fate for the US-installed Libyan government. The Libyan people will never accept such an illigetimate birth. One can easily accuse the Interim Council of having aborted the people revolution by soliciting the support of the Americans; who are known for hating Arabs and Muslims. Let Dr Ahmad Jibril visit America and see how much humiliation he reieves, just because he has a Muslim name. He who doesn´t learn from other´s mistakes is apt to repeat them.

Adnan Darwash, Iraq Occupation Times

[Guest David]

Adnan,

You are such a liar it sickens me. There are American Muslim soldiers protecting the USA. There are American Muslim, police, rescue, etc... You are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem. Your style of writing is no different from Nazis, Skin Heads, Klu Klux Klan, Black Panthers etc...

 

All you do is preach hate. Therefore, I surmise that you are very dark person who probably grinds his teeth. If Dr Ahmad Jibril lived in the USA he most likely would not even get noticed. There is over a million Arab citizens in this country. You really need help.

[Guest August]

Adnan the man you mention, Dr. Ahmad Jibril, makes statements the conflict with Islamic faith. I understand Dr. Jibril is Palestinian, but is he Islamic? If so, then his argument makes no sense?

 

Dr. Ahmad Jibril: Why did they bring the [Jews] here? Can you believe they talk about historical myths, from 3,000 years ago or more, in which God promised to give Abraham the land from the Nile to the Euphrates?

 

Just imagine, the Master of the Universe, who is absolute justice, brings these people and says to them: "You own this land and everything on it." Then they say that in the days of Jacob, they were given Palestine, the Promised Land.

 

One should know, however, that history and archeology have yet to prove that a Jewish state was ever established on the land of Palestine, or that such a state survived and gave rise to civilizations, and so on...

 

It is said that gangs controlled Jerusalem, Hebron, and Nablus, and that later, they were uprooted, just like any other gang. They did not give rise to a civilization. The Arabs and Muslims lived for 700 years in Andalusia. Why shouldn't we claim that Andalusia is our homeland?

 

http://www.liveleak....=d6e_1211440555

 

In the beginning of his call to Islam, Muhammad spoke highly concerning the Jews and declared that Allah assigned the Holy Land to them. The Quran says:

 

"We did aforetime grant to the Children of Israel the Book the Power of Command, and Prophethood; We gave them, for Sustenance, things good and pure; and We favoured them above the nations.

(Surat Al-Jathiya 45:16).

http://www.muslimacc.../arabic/045.asp

 

"O Children of Israel, remember My favor that I have bestowed upon you and that I preferred you over the worlds."

(Surate Al-Baqarah 2:47)

http://quran.com/2/47

 

In this passage God gives the Holy Land to the Jewish People

 

"O my people, enter the holy land that GOD has decreed for you, and do not rebel, lest you become losers."

 

They said, "O Moses, there are powerful people in it, and we will not enter it, unless they get out of it. If they get out, we are entering."

 

Two men who were reverent and blessed by GOD said, "Just enter the gate. If you just enter it, you will surely prevail. You must trust in GOD, if you are believers."

(Sura - 5:20-23)

http://www.submissio...suras/sura5.htm

[Guest HUMAN]

Yes!!! I'm enjoying this too.

 

If it is in fact that it will just be a STRICKLY no fly zone? Then Muammar Muhammad al-Gaddafi

WINS.

 

When some Republicans were telling President Obama to go on in? He should have gone in!

 

You play to Win When You Commit.

 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

LOL.

[Guest LAW]

Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jay Carney, Secretary of Energy Steven Chu and Deputy Assistant to the President for Energy and Climate Change Heather Zichal, 3/30/2011

 

Q On this issue of vetting, is this process continuing so that the U.S. gets a better understanding of what the leadership structure is of the opposition, who exactly it is that you're dealing with?

 

MR. CARNEY: Yes.

 

Q Can you explain --

 

MR. CARNEY: The process is continuing. I mean, just as you would expect it to continue. We have contacts with the opposition. The Contact Group that was stood up will obviously play a role in that. And it's not just the United States. This is an international coalition -- that we are working together with our international partners on all facets of this. This is a -- but simply to say that, yes, we are continuing to discuss -- have conversations with the opposition and to evaluate the opposition and to assess what the makeup of it is there in Libya.

Q And is the administration finding anything more than just the flickers of al Qaeda or other --

 

MR. CARNEY: Well, I'll point you to what Ambassador Rice said, which is that that answer to that is no. And what's important to remember about what we're seeing in Libya, like what we saw in other countries, is that the motivation, the ideals, the aspirations that are expressed in these popular movements are antithetical in many ways to the -- in all ways, really -- to the purposes and ideals set forth by terrorist organizations who use violence against innocent civilians to achieve their goals are quite the contrary to the kind of protests we've seen in Egypt and Tunisia and other countries. In Libya we're very much driven by the kind of ideals that are, like I said, antithetical to those who support violence to achieve their goals.

 

Q Since the President, Jay, hasn’t ruled out providing weapons to the Libyan opposition, does he believe he can do that without also providing U.S. trainers, or that providing U.S. trainers wouldn’t break his promise not to put boots on the ground there? MR. CARNEY: The President made very clear that there will not be U.S. troops -- no boots on the ground in Libya.

 

Q So he believes you could possibly provide weapons without sending U.S. trainers?

 

MR. CARNEY: I don't see why not.

 

Q And does he -- does he feel that he could provide U.S. weapons and make sure none of them fall into the hands of the flickers of al Qaeda that there may be?

 

MR. CARNEY: Well, Wendell, you're leading me down the road of things that may happen if a decision is made that hasn’t been made.

 

Q What I’m actually trying to do is find out whether some things the President has said and some realities -- like weapons are stolen and sold -- actually preclude the U.S. providing --

 

MR. CARNEY: I would simply say that there are a lot of factors that go into a decision like that, and some of the factors would be probably related to the questions that you’re asking. Obviously, we would not make a decision like that if we did not think that it was the smart way to go, and that the policy goals it would serve were achievable and outweighed the risks involved. That's how we approach all these issues.

 

 

[Guest Nate]

Media is buzzing on presidential order that gave CIA operatives the green light to go into Libya.

 

http://abcnews.go.com/International/president-obama-authorizes-covert-libyan-rebels/story?id=13259028

 

President Obama has a signed a secret presidential finding authorizing covert operations to aid the effort in Libya where rebels are in full retreat despite air support from U.S. and allied forces, a source tells ABC News.

 

The presidential finding discusses a number of ways to help the opposition to Moammar Gadhafi, authorizing some assistance now and setting up a legal framework for more robust activities in the future.

 

http://my.news.yahoo.com/obama-authorizes-secret-support-libya-rebels-20110330-125605-875.html

 

(Reuters) - President Barack Obama has signed a secret order authorizing covert U.S. government support for rebel forces seeking to oust Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, government officials told Reuters on Wednesday.

 

Obama signed the order, known as a presidential "finding", within the last two or three weeks, according to government sources familiar with the matter.

 

Such findings are a principal form of presidential directive used to authorize secret operations by the Central Intelligence Agency. This is a necessary legal step before such action can take place but does not mean that it will.

 

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2011-03-30/al-qaedas-libya-pilgrimage/full/#

 

According to Afghan Taliban sources close to Osama bin Laden's terrorist group, some of the 200 or so Libyans operating near the Afghan border may be on their way home to steer the anti-Gaddafi revolution in a more Islamist direction.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/31/world/africa/31intel.html?_r=1

 

While President Obama has insisted that no American military ground troops participate in the Libyan campaign, small groups of C.I.A. operatives have been working in Libya for several weeks as part of a shadow force of Westerners that the Obama administration hopes can help bleed Colonel Qaddafi’s military, the officials said.

 

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2011/03/30/cia-operatives-reportedly-ground-libya/

 

An American official and a former U.S. intelligence officer, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the information, told the AP about the CIA's involvement in Libya after the agency was forced to close its station in Tripoli, the capital.

 

They said CIA helped safely recover the F-15E Strike Eagle's weapons specialist, who was first picked up by rebels after the crash March 21. The pilot was rescued by Marines.

[Guest Desert Rat]

I find it curious that a former U.S. intelligence officer, Iran, and Russia have been doing their best to discredit the whole operation.

[Guest tarheel]

Yes!!! I'm enjoying this too.

 

If it is in fact that it will just be a STRICKLY no fly zone? Then Muammar Muhammad al-Gaddafi

WINS.

 

When some Republicans were telling President Obama to go on in? He should have gone in!

 

You play to Win When You Commit.

 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Guest Adnan Darwash]

The Transitional Interim National Council welcomes the UN Security Council resolution 1973 (2011), as well as the outcome of the Paris meeting held on 19th of March, 2011, and commends all efforts exerted to expedite the implementation of the resolution, especially with regards to the imposition of the No-Fly Zone and the aerial attacks against Qadhafi's brigades, which were approaching to enter the city of Benghazi and bombarding the city from all directions. The coalition aerial attacks prevented a genocide in the city, forced Qadhafi's brigades to retreat away from the city, and brought back tranquility in the hearts of innocent civilians who had initiated to move away from the city.

 

While the Council is surprised by the statements of some countries and figures who have criticized the use of force against Qadhafi's brigades which were bombarding the densely populated cities before the eyes of the international community, whereas Qadhfi is accusing the resolution with illegitimacy, confirming his non-compliance with it, threating to open armoires and transforming the Mediterranean region into a battle field, The Council affirms that the use of force by the international coalition was in accordance with paragraph 4 of the Security Council resolution referred to above which calls on all States to use all necessary measures to protect civilians. In this regard, the Council calls upon all States to bear their responsibilities towards the massacres perpetrated against the civilians, especially in the city of Misurata for bombarding all vital sites in the city as well as the intense bombardment of the city of Azzintan after cutting off all means of communications, water and electricity and preventing all humanitarians assistance for these two cities.

 

The Council warns the international community of the crimes perpetrated by the Qadhfi regime including the abduction of the bodies of those who have been killed by Qadhafi's brigades and shown to the media as causalities of the bombardment of the international forces in order to mislead the world, hence, the Council confirms that there were no casualties due to UN coalition bombing, as confirmed by medical source and eyewitnesses.

 

The Council reiterates its urgent appeal to the international community and all brotherly and friendly countries to carry out their responsibilities to break the siege and stop the Qadhafi's bombing against a number of Libyan cities, especially the cities of Misurata and AzZintan and to protect civilians in accordance with Article 4 of the Security Council resolution 1973.

 

The council derives it legitimacy from the decisions of local councils set up by the revolutionary people of Libya on the 17th of February. These local councils facilitated a mechanism to manage daily life in the liberated cities and villages. The council consists of thirty one members representing the various cities of Libya from the east to the west and from the north to the south. The aim of the Transitional National Council is to steer Libya during the interim period that will come after its complete liberation and the destruction of Gaddafi’s oppressive regime. It will guide the country to free elections and the establishment of a constitution for Libya.The Council members representing Al Buntan, Al Gubbah and Benghazi have been named while the names of those representing Ajdabiya, Zintan, Misratah, Nalut and Ghat have not been disclosed due to security reasons. The council is awaiting the nomination of representatives from the central and southern regions as well as Tripoli.

 

 

 

The Libyan Interim National Council

The Interim National Council has lost credibility after collaborating with the Americans and their European allies. Its members will not fare better than those in Iraq who entered behind American tanks. The likes of Dr Allawi, Dr Al-Chalabi and Talabini are isolated inside the Green Zone and travels guarded by scores of foreign and local mercenaries. One day the Iraqis will make them pay for the destruction of Iraq and for the killing of thousands. The Libyan Interim Council may win but will end up losing. No-one repects traitors.

Adnan Darwash, Iraq Occupation Times

[Guest August]

Dr. Ahmad Jibril: Why did they bring the [Jews] here? Can you believe they talk about historical myths, from 3,000 years ago or more, in which God promised to give Abraham the land from the Nile to the Euphrates?

 

Just imagine, the Master of the Universe, who is absolute justice, brings these people and says to them: "You own this land and everything on it." Then they say that in the days of Jacob, they were given Palestine, the Promised Land.

 

One should know, however, that history and archeology have yet to prove that a Jewish state was ever established on the land of Palestine, or that such a state survived and gave rise to civilizations, and so on...

 

It is said that gangs controlled Jerusalem, Hebron, and Nablus, and that later, they were uprooted, just like any other gang. They did not give rise to a civilization. The Arabs and Muslims lived for 700 years in Andalusia. Why shouldn't we claim that Andalusia is our homeland?

 

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=d6e_1211440555

 

You lose credibility if you cannot defend your statements within reason. No one respects those that speak blasphemy. Is Dr. Ahmad Jibril Islamic?

[Guest Zhana]

I find it curious that a former U.S. intelligence officer, Iran, and Russia have been doing their best to discredit the whole operation.

 

These degenerates hate the fact that President Obama will be credited for stopping a massacre in Benghanzi, creating the conditions for a no-fly zone, and exiting the military conflict in 13 days!!!

[Guest Funkadelic]

I love how President Obama wields Power.

 

It's very difficult for the old-guard to accept that the ethos behind the phrase, "White-Man's Burden" is over!" And it has been over for quite some time.

 

If Kadaffi had been allowed to go full bore Defcon 1 on his own people with impunity, the other dictators in the region would have followed suit the very next day!

 

President Obama stopped not just a massacre in Benghazi, but a rash of massacres throughout the Arab world.

[Guest Larry L.]

Make no mistake – the Mid-East is about oil. Until we don't need oil we'll be forced to spend American lives and fortune to keep the flow moving toward our SUVs and hot-tubs. We're all hypocrites if we pretend this is a humanitarian issue. It's time for Americans to make the hard choices.