Library - Africa

(Codewit World News Libya) It is so sad and disappointing to see one of the few relatively developed· African country been· systematically targeted and destroyed by the western forces on a pretext of protecting civilians.· A sham mission·· shrouded with UN resolution 1973, which was supposedly intended only to impose a no fly zone over libya, has extended its mission to engage in civil war whereby they have unilaterally· launched more than 6000 aggressive assualt/attack on the libyan soil, killing thousands of civilians and·destroying a lot Libyan infrastructure.

The Libyan government says NATO's intervention is an act of colonial aggression by Western powers bent on stealing the country's oil. The war has caused misery for tens of thousands forced to flee overland or by boat. Aid agencies say witnesses reported a vessel carrying between 500 and 600 people foundered late last week near Tripoli and that many bodies were seen in the water.

What is the exit strategy? On so many accounts the Libyan government forces have retreated to seek for peace but NATO led by UK and France and the rebel forces are advancing and perpetuating the lies of protecting civilians,· are they actually "protecting civilians," or are they supporting the rebel offensive? If they are intervening in a civil war, shouldn't the UN security council debate that? If actual effect of their military activity on the ground is to support a rebel offensive to overthrow the Libyan government militarily - regardless of NATO statements that that is not their objective - shouldn't UN debate that?

We are all aware of the power of media. Information is power and the most critically sought commodity in today's world. We know that those that control· information are usually seemed to be the most powerful in our contemporary society. For decades now, the west have told our stories, report our wars and discredit our local journalists to suit their interest.  So it is not suprising that the western media reporting on the Libya war has been so bias and uneven. Most of their journalist tends to speak in favor of the rebels to please their respective government propanganda. I can't but wonder what will UK and France government would have done if it were in their respective countries that we have few dissidents or protesters risen up against their government and insisting of their resignation. Somebody will have to give me an answer. 

This article is to remind our Libyan brothers to ponder and think it over whether this war worth the lost of lives and destruction of our country. Let us not allow foreigners come into our country and reduce us to a Somali state. We use to be a rich country  and we have lived relatively a sound and good life. We have benefited immensenly on our government programs. why are we been fooled. Who will rebuild our country after this massive destruction? Think about the effect. These foreigners are only helping us to destroy our country.

We can see how the western world still perpetuate the master /slave relationship over Africa. Why will this foreigners decide for us. why will they· remain in our country killing our people and destroying our resources and infrastucture on a pretext of protecting us. Is it justifiable to allow foreign people in libyan soil killing our people only because few dissidents from one city in our country are rising against our government.· As this war continue, so many questions remain unanswered

Is there any justification for· Western invasion and military attack in Libya?

Is the Civil war in Libya between· Pro Western Rebel forces· Vs Pro forces loyal to Gaddafi

Is the rebels having media advantage or is the report coming from the Western media one sided and bias

Is the war in Libya just a Revenge game? I mean is the West and US taking revenge against Libyan leader in expense of civilians casualties?

Is their an implicit order to kill the Libyan leader as he has been targeted more than four times with western pretense of looking for command centers.

Why is the Western world explicitly supporting· the rebels

What is the exit strategy?

what happens next after NATO led Benghazi Rebels wins? What about Tripoli pro Gaddafi regime

·Does the UK, France and U.S. support real negotiations to resolve the crisis, or is it the de facto position of the West and U.S. that the war must continue, with the UK, France and U.S. de facto supporting the armed rebels' offensive, until the Libyan government is overthrown by force? If it is the de facto U.S and UK. position that the war must continue until the Libyan government is overthrown, what is the U.S and UK. plan for running Libya after the Libyan government is overthrown? Are the armed rebels to become the new Libyan government? Has a determination been made that armed rebels from Benghazi will be accepted by people in Tripoli as their legitimate government? If people in Tripoli organize an armed rebellion against a new government led by people from Benghazi, what will be the· position of UK and France ? Will we assist the new government in suppressing such a rebellion with force? And what role is envisioned for Western oil companies in a new Libyan government's management of Libya's oil wealth?

Who will rebuild Libya? Who will rebuild Libya?

Appearing on Russia Today, Kuperman dismissed the Obama administration's claim that there would be a "bloodbath" in Libya if there was no foreign intervention, pointing out that there is no evidence Gaddafi is deliberately targeting civilians and engaging in massacres.

The EU is now awaiting the green light from the United Nations as it prepares to do what the initial UN resolution specifically forbade – sending in ground troops in the name of “humanitarian aid”. The EU has made it clear that its troops will attack Gaddafi forces if they are impeded in any way from taking over regions in the east of the country, and securing “sea and land corridors”.

Of course, the ground invasion was already unfolding before the so-called “no fly zone” was even enforced, with hundreds of British, American and French special forces troops arriving in the country at the end of February to train rebels. The humanitarian hoax was then manufactured as a veil with which to camouflage NATO’s wanton act of aggression, with the corporate media dutifully regurgitating baseless claims about Gaddafi slaughtering his own people while concocting lies about his regime using western journalists as human shields.

In addition, lurid claims about Gaddafi forces bombing “protesters” from fighter jets on February 22 over Benghazi and Tripoli were completely dismissed by Russian military experts, who said that sophisticated satellite imagery from space showed no record of such actions.

Asked about claims of Gaddafi violence against innocents, Professor Kuperman responded, “There is no evidence of that in the cities that Gaddafi has captured either totally or partially,” citing Human Rights Watch figures that clearly illustrate how Gaddafi forces are targeting combatants and not innocent people.

In an op-ed for the Boston Globe, Kuperman accuses Barack Obama of “grossly exaggerated the humanitarian threat to justify military action in Libya,” highlighting the fact that the evidence clearly indicates Gaddafi is “Not deliberately massacring civilians but rather narrowly targeting the armed rebels who fight against his government.”

“Misurata’s population is roughly 400,000. In nearly two months of war, only 257 people — including combatants — have died there. Of the 949 wounded, only 22 — less than 3 percent — are women. If Khadafy were indiscriminately targeting civilians, women would comprise about half the casualties,” writes Kuperman, adding that the only thing to deepen the humanitarian suffering of innocents was the NATO-led attack, which will indefinitely prolong the civil war.

Of course, to the western media, rebels driving tanks, flying fighter jets and carrying RPG launchers are still classed as “protesters” or “civilians” in the Orwellian doublespeak world of humanitarian hypocrisy.

While the corporate media has played up Gaddafi’s supposed attacks on innocent people, evidence of which is thin on the ground, videos, images and testimony of rebel fighters engaging in massacres and beatings of innocents, including children, has been universally ignored.

While it’s obvious that there have been acts of brutal retaliation carried out by both sides that have killed innocent people, to claim that Gaddafi is overseeing a deliberate policy to attack innocents even as he battles against the might of NATO and the western-backed rebel forces is brazenly deceptive. Even the New York Times had to admit that the rebels were “making vastly inflated claims of his (Gaddafi’s) barbaric behavior,” and had “no loyalty to the truth in shaping their propaganda,” after the much promised “bloodbath” in Benghazi never materialized.

Stock up with Fresh Food that lasts with eFoodsDirect (Ad)

The humanitarian hoax behind the assault on Africa’s richest oil country was invented out of whole cloth to prevent what globalist forces feared most, the defeat of their own Al-Qaeda backed rebel forces.

“The actual prospect in Benghazi was the final defeat of the rebels,” writes Kuperman. “To avoid this fate, they desperately concocted an impending genocide to rally international support for “humanitarian’’ intervention that would save their rebellion.”

Chairman Joint Staff Admiral Mike Mullen General David Petraeus Carter Ham Wesley Clark Secretary Defense Bob Robert Gates Alex Jones Peter Schiff Wayne Madsen Webster Tarpley Gerald Celente Max Keiser Bob Chapman Dennis Kucinich Ron Paul

Source : Info War

< Prev		Next >