tagged w/ NATO
-
A senior Pakistani army official has said a NATO cross-border air attack that killed 24 soldiers was a deliberate, blatant act of aggression, hardening Pakistan's stance on an incident which could hurt efforts to stabilise Afghanistan.
link:http://in.reuters.com/article/2011/11/30/pakistan-nato-idINDEE7AT02920111130A senior Pakistani army official has said a NATO cross-border air attack that killed... more
-
-
The mistaken NATO air attack on Pakistani military outposts over the weekend, in which 24 soldiers were killed, was an accident waiting to happen.
link:http://edition.cnn.com/2011/11/28/world/asia/pakistan-nato-kunar/index.html?hpt=hp_c1The mistaken NATO air attack on Pakistani military outposts over the weekend, in which... more
-
-
Responding to Washington’s failure to bring Russia on board the European missile defense system, President Dmitry Medvedev announces sweeping plans to address what Moscow is calling a threat to national security.
Medvedev said he will deploy strike systems in the west and south of the country and deploy Iskander missiles in the Kaliningrad region in order to counter the risk posed by the European missile defense system.
“By my order the Defense Ministry will run in a warning system radar station in Kaliningrad without delay,” the Russian President said, commenting from his resident of Gorki on the outskirts of Moscow
Russia may also refuse to undertake additional steps toward disarmament in the event that its national security remains at risk.
“In the event of unfavorable developments (in regards to European missile defense), Russia reserves the right to halt further steps in the disarmament sphere and, respectively, weapons control,” Medvedev said. “Besides, given the inseparable interconnection between the strategic offensive and defensive weapons, grounds may appear for our country’s withdrawal from the START treaty.”
New START, which limits the number of deployed strategic nuclear warheads to 1,550, was signed on April 8, 2010 in Prague and went into force on February 5, 2011.
Meanwhile, Medvedev stressed that Russia remains open to dialogue with the US and NATO regarding missile defense issues, but the cooperation must have clear legal parameters.
"We are not closing the door to further dialogue on missile defense with the US and the North Atlantic alliance, nor to practical cooperation in this area. We are ready for further dialogue," the Russian leader stressed. "The path towards such work depends upon the creation of a clear legal basis for our cooperation that will reflect our legitimate interests."
There is still time to come to mutual understanding, the Russian leader said.
Medvedev reiterated his belief that the formation of a “joint and sectored missile defense system,” which he proposed at the Russia-NATO Council summit in Lisbon, would open up the prospects for a “real strategic partnership between Russia and NATO.”
"Europe doesn't need new demarcation lines,” Medvedev said. “It needs a single perimeter of security with equal legal participation from the Russian side."
Medvedev said that US and NATO reluctance to cooperate is unfortunate because “even now such an approach is opening unique opportunities for Russia and NATO's advancement towards a truly strategic partnership."
President Medvedev also mentioned that in 2009 when US President Barack Obama decided to “scrap” the missile defense plans laid out by his predecessor, George W. Bush, Russia’s reaction was quite positive.He said the apparent change allowed the two states to sign the New START treaty. Later, however, the United States started to implement the so-called stage-by-stage missile defense plan, while denying Russia’s participation in the project. Naturally, this concerns Russia, Medvedev said.
Read the full text of President Dmitry Medvedev's address on missile defense.Responding to Washington’s failure to bring Russia on board the European missile... more
-
-
RD Magazine | Global & Regional Political Analysis
http://rencadesign.com/wp/2011/11/who-is-the-regional-power-of-the-middle-east-iran-turkey-or-al-jazeera-channel/
“That’s one small step for a man, one giant leap for mankind.” Everybody knows when and where these words were spoken and by who. Thanks to the power of the media, millions all across the world have watched the unforgettable moment when first foot step of the mankind left its mark on the Moon’s surface. July 21, 1969 witnessed probably the most famous live media coverage of the world so far.
Things have changed a lot since those black&white days. In 2011, media does not only mean TV and radio or newspaper publishing, we have internet, mobile phones, tablets etc. Censorship has become the biggest enemy of the free speech, however, it is not likely to win the war against the will of the people to learn what has been going on around them.
“The media’s the most powerful entity on earth. They have the power to make the innocent guilty and to make the guilty innocent, and that’s power. Because they control the minds of the masses.” This quote is from a person who used the power of media in order to promote his views of freedom and democracy to the American public and the whole world. Of course, he faced exactly the opposite as well. Malcolm X became one of the greatest and most influential African-American in the history, despite spending his 6 years in prison from the age of 20 to 26.
Remember how American public believed that Saddam Hussein had WMD and was a threat for democracy, how media decided that invasion of Iraq was legal and how people accepted it. This will never end. Who ever controls the main stream media, controls the public opinion.
People of the Middle East have witnessed the Arab Spring and still watching how masses are rioting and demonstrating against the dictatorships of the region. The game is underway and media is being used in order to bring the public opinion to the deserved point on different occasions. Syria is occupying the headlines as the people of America are occupying the Wall Street. The game is for the leadership of the next Middle East order. Players are outsiders as well as region’s big boys.
Turkey, Iran and Saudi Arabia are the most influential countries in the region. Iran does not want to lose it’s leverage over Syria. Turkey and Saudi Arabia however, wants to have more control over Damascus, one of the key capitols of the Middle East, by encouraging and supporting the people to overthrow the government. Iran has the backing of Russia and China, while Turkey as a NATO member has the advantage of having the west with her. Turkey wants to use it’s military and economic power, backing of NATO, while trying to keep the Arab League on her side. NATO approval may cancel out a UN resolution requirement and Arab League support means green light from the region for more serious actions against Assad.
But there is one big problem here. The Emirs and Sheikhs of the oil rich Arab countries know that their turn will come sooner or later. Siding with the west may not help always, because the west is not so reliable when the talk is about the oil and energy. Here comes our Weapon of Media Coverage or WMC.
Qatar is another oil rich Arab country with a powerful WMC in her hands. Qatar has an absolute monarchic government, with Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani as the Emir or head of the ruling family. Qatar has been very busy to promote the country in the world stage lately. They are clearly in a race with the Middle Eastern business center, Dubai in constructing state of the art skyscrapers and trying to become the next Dubai.
Probably Qatar’s biggest move was their bid for the World Cup 2022, which they were chosen to host the event. There were some controversies regarding Qatar’s bid but FIFA did not change its mind and the 2022 World Cup will be held in Qatar.
Doha based news channel Al Jazeera, started its English broadcast in 2005 and since then it is region’s most followed news source in English. Al Jazeera has a very well established news network through out the Middle East and some major world capitols. Lately, Al Jazeera is summoned by some Arab leaders for being biased and trying to create a public opinion against some governments, mainly Libya and Syria. Since, Libya has been “liberated”, the headlines are mostly about Syria.
If we go a few months back, Al Jazeera had a stance of promoting Turkey and it’s PM , Erdogan as a regional leader and you could easily see many news coverage about Erdogan and Turkey, mostly in favor of their speeches and actions against Israel, Libyan and Syrian governments. It is very noticeable that these kind of news have been decreased in number lately and the comments and opinions in the Al Jazeera articles are no longer giving full support to the Turkish government. The authors’ opinions have shifted 180 degrees, mostly claiming that Turkey is never a good model for the region and should stay away from Arab’s internal affairs, just opposite of the same authors’ articles a few months back.
We can explain this change with the ambitions of the Qatari Emir and government. Mr.Al Thani wants to have more say on the regional matters and have influence on the Gulf countries. So Al Jazeera decided that Turkish stance is a threat for Qatari ambitions and started promoting Qatari Emir as the mediator and center of influence in the Middle East. How people would react to the idea of a Qatari leadership is unknown.
We have witnessed through out the world history, taking advantage of the media. However, Qatari use of Al Jazeera Channel seems somehow ineffective, when one considers the location of the State of Qatar and its Emir in the scene of politics. Media itself is not such a great weapon when you lack of the most important properties of being a regional power : a strong military, stable economy (not based on only oil exports, but includes manufacturing industry and a good banking system), a functioning democracy, historical background of leadership and having strong allies.
Qatar seems to have a long way to go, before it claims to be a regional power.
Continue Reading Here ... http://rencadesign.com/wp/2011/11/who-is-the-regional-power-of-the-middle-east-iran-turkey-or-al-jazeera-channel/RD Magazine | Global & Regional Political Analysis... more
-
-
artq8
-
added this
-
6 months ago
- |
-
The danger of local armed conflicts along Russia's borders exploding into full-scale nuclear war has grown following the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russia’s chief of staff said on Thursday.
General Nikolai Makarov told the Russian Public Chamber there is a dangerous level of mistrust with former Soviet states that border the country.
"The possibility of local armed conflicts virtually along the entire perimeter of the border has grown dramatically," Makarov said. “I cannot rule out that, in certain circumstances, local and regional armed conflicts could grow into a large-scale war, possibly even with nuclear weapons.”
Makarov mentioned NATO’s steady encroachment toward Russia’s borders as one of the key reasons for the heightened level of mistrust in the region since the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991.
"Almost all countries formerly belonging to the Warsaw Pact have become NATO members, and the Baltic States that were earlier a part of the USSR have also joined the alliance,” Russia’s top military official said.
Moscow has often criticized the western military bloc for going back on its word not to expand following the collapse of the USSR.
"At time of the withdrawal from Eastern Europe, the NATO Secretary General promised the USSR it could be confident that NATO would not expand beyond its current boundaries," Prime Minister Vladimir Putin said in a past comment. "So where is it now?” I asked them [the NATO officials]. They have nothing to say. They deceived us in the rudest way.”
Meanwhile, the comments by Chief of Staff Makarov did contain a silver lining in the nuclear cloud.
Speaking on the prospects of the New START treaty, signed by President Dmitry Medvedev and his US counterpart Barack Obama, Makarov was optimistic.
"The previous START treaty was flawed, but there were attempts to extend it,” he said. “The new START is the first treaty that satisfies us.”
On the US missile defense system planned for Eastern Europe, the Russian general said the new START gives Moscow the flexibility its new defense measures require.
“This treaty gives us the ability to secede in certain cases,” he said, specifically mentioning the “European missile defense problem” as a national security threat that could force Moscow to breach the treaty.
http://rt.com/politics/makarov-nuclear-russia-nato-575/The danger of local armed conflicts along Russia's borders exploding into... more
-
-
-
In the spirit of transparency, President Dmitry Medvedev has reiterated Moscow’s need for written guarantees that the US missile defense shield in Europe would not be targeted at Russian territory.
Medvedev was meeting with US President Obama on the sidelines of the APEC Summit in Honolulu, Hawaii.
On his way back from the summit, Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov spoke more about the situation. "It was said: if we are heard – and President Medvedev made a clear statement to Obama – we want to have some clear guarantees on paper.”
The Foreign Minister mentioned “problems with the Congress” as the reason for Washington’s foot-dragging on what should be a mere bureaucratic formality.
“If there are some problems with the Congress, as we are told – no one has ever tried to give us the guarantees," he said.
Although the Democrats have their man in the Oval Office, the Republicans continue to enjoy an unprecedented amount of influence in the Washington decision-making process.
Former Vice President Dick Cheney, for example, who began his Washington career back in 1975 as Gerald Ford’s chief of staff, almost singlehandedly defeated Obama’s efforts to shutter Guantanamo Bay detention facility, a task that the president had promised to complete once in office. Four years on, the facility branded ‘the GULAG of our times’ by Amnesty International is still open for business.
Now, with the Democrats and Republicans hitting the trenches for next year’s presidential elections, Obama will be wary of giving the opposition any extra ammunition in what promises to be a political mud-fest.
Meanwhile, Medvedev, noting the mixed signals he is getting from Washington, announced that he would make a decisive statement on the issue soon.
"It is unclear to us what our partners are offering, and I think we will in the near future determine what we should do with the European missile defensive system," Medvedev said at a press conference after the APEC Summit. "I believe that in the near future I will have to give a complete assessment on how Russia is to react to the developing situation now, as well as after 2012.”
Although Medvedev lauded the achievements forged with Obama, he acknowledged that this particular area is proving thorny.
"In regard to the European missile defense system, the situation is much more difficult," he said.
Russia has expressed its staunch opposition to the deployment of a US missile defense system near its borders, claiming it would present a security threat. NATO and the United States argue that the shield would help defend Eastern Europe against a hypothetical missile attack from rogue countries, usually identified as Iran. The cost of this unproven security against such a threat, which many analysts say is dubious at best, could turn out to be nothing less than Russia’s friendship.
President Medvedev has warned of an imminent arms race unless the US and NATO find a way to cooperate with Moscow in the project.
“After 2020, if we do not come to terms, a real arms race will begin," the Russian leader warned in May at the G8 Summit in Deauville, France.
Most frustrating to Russian diplomats is that Moscow and NATO agreed to cooperate on the European missile shield during the NATO-Russia Council summit in Lisbon in November 2010. Later, however, NATO began to argue there should be two independent systems that exchange information. Russia favors a joint system with full-scale interoperability.
Meanwhile, the unfurling shield continues to encroach on Russia’s ‘near abroad’.
Bucharest announced in May that it had reached an agreement with Washington to deploy US missile interceptors at a defunct Soviet airbase on its territory. At this point, Moscow issued an urgent request for legal assurances from the United States that the system was not designed to target Russia's strategic nuclear forces.
Although such a simple gesture would do much to put Moscow at ease, Washington has so far declined to provide any written guarantees.
http://rt.com/politics/medvedev-obama-missile-defense-apec-269/In the spirit of transparency, President Dmitry Medvedev has reiterated Moscow’s... more
-
-
After devastating Libya and partaking in the murder of an estimated 100,000 Libyan men, women and children, RAF pilots return home to their families in the UK. In a deeply obscene news update, the Daily Mail is literally using ‘puppy dog’ imagery to cynically whitewash the murderous war crimes that these British pilots have committed.
The article of November 1st, titled: ‘Overjoyed spaniel welcomes home her master as Libya Tornado crews return‘, contains heartwarming photos of an RAF pilot’s spaniel dog(1) being reunited with her master. The “touching scenes” include another RAF pilot’s three year-old son “looking on proudly“, dressed in his miniature RAF uniform.
In the report, RAF Wing Commander Andy Turk repeats the ‘no boots’ lie, “Because there were no British troops, it was very important that the RAF maintained our intelligence and surveillance“. This is one of the most notorious myths of the Libya war; not mentioned in the piece is the well-known fact that British SAS troops have been on the ground(2) in Libya, leading the ground war ever since February.(3)
What is perhaps even more sickening than this grotesque display of ‘puppy dog’ jingoism is the comments posted by Daily Mail readers. Comments included “Fantastic job done again guys and lovely pictures. Welcome home and well done,” and “My son worked round the clock at RAF Lossiemouth to keep those GR4 Tornadoes flying to Lybia, via Italy. Proud of you, son“. One reader even felt the need to voice how uplifting the story was: “Best story I’ve read all week. All the pics are great but the spaniel’s unbridled joy at seeing her loved one return is especially uplifting“.
This contemptuous piece of ‘journalism’ serves as a reminder of how emotion and opinion has been manipulated over the Libya war. Here, the utter criminality of NATO’s genocidal onslaught has been whitewashed by the heartwarming imagery of a pining puppy dog. These are heights of manipulation that this writer previously thought unreachable, even by the most cynically depraved minds.After devastating Libya and partaking in the murder of an estimated 100,000 Libyan... more
-
-
THE installation of the National Transitional Council (NTC) government in Libya by the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) could signal the beginning of an open neocolonial scramble for Africa. Suspicions about such a blueprint were first aroused when President George W. Bush set up the United States-Africa Command (AFRICOM) in 2008, months before demitting office. The demand for a permanent American military footprint on the African continent had come from right-wing think tanks that enjoyed great clout in the corridors of power during the eight years of the Bush presidency.
A background paper prepared in 2002 by the influential right-wing think tank Heritage Foundation had called for the creation of a military command for the continent so that “direct military intervention”, using air power and naval forces, could become possible to “protect vital U.S. interests” in Africa. Such interventions, its authors wrote, would not necessitate the deployment of U.S. forces on the ground. Such wars, the paper proposed, should be fought with the help of local allies. The U.S. Defence Department's African Contingency Operation Training and Assistance Programme is deeply involved in training the armies of many countries, including Ethiopia, Kenya, Uganda and Ghana, America's close allies in the region.
The authors of the paper clearly spelt out what they meant by vital interests: “With its vast natural and mineral resources, Africa remains strategically important to the West, as it has been for hundreds of years, and its geostrategic significance is likely to rise in the 21st century.” According to the National Intelligence Council, “the United States is likely to draw 25 per cent of its oil from West Africa by 2015, surpassing the volume imported from the Persian Gulf”, the Heritage Foundation study reported. The Bush administration's Assistant Secretary of State for Africa Walter Kansteiner was quick to echo the views expressed by the foundation. He went on record stating that Africa's oil had “become a national strategic interest”.
Libya is among Africa's biggest oil producers. China was importing 11 per cent of Libyan oil for its domestic needs before the NATO-instigated civil war in the North African state started seven months ago. It could now find itself locked out of new oil contracts. Top functionaries of the NTC have said that China, Russia and Brazil would be frozen out of contracts.
These countries had criticised the misuse of the United Nations Security Council resolution on Libya to bring about a regime change. China gets around one-third of its oil from Africa. The French newspaper Liberacion recently published documents revealing the NTC leadership's offer of 35 per cent of Libya's oil production to France in return for its “total and permanent support” for the new government. Gene Cretz, the U.S. Ambassador to Libya, recently blurted out that “oil is the jewel of the crown of Libyan national resources”.
President Barack Obama, who famously claimed that he was leading the war in Libya “from behind”, used precisely the tactics prescribed in the Heritage Foundation report. AFRICOM played an important behind-the-scenes role in planning the U.S./NATO bombing of Libya. U.S. Special Forces teamed up with its counterparts from France and the United Kingdom to arm and organise the ragtag rebel forces into a fighting unit. It was the coordinated air strikes, coupled with an amphibious operation led by the U.S., that finally led to the fall of Tripoli. South African President Jacob Zuma complained bitterly that it was NATO bombing that prevented the African Union (A.U.) from hammering out a negotiated settlement to the civil war in Libya. More than 200 prominent Africans wrote an open letter in August criticising the recourse to “militarised diplomacy to effect regime change in Libya”.
In early October, a few days before the fall of Sirte and the killing of Muammar Qaddafi, Obama ordered the despatch of 100 U.S. Special Forces troops to Uganda. He said the decision to send the troops was taken to help the U.S.' ally in the region, Yoweri Museveni, defeat the Lord's Resistance Army (LRA), which was engaged in a guerilla war with the central government in Kampala. Obama told Congress that the troops were deployed in order “to assist African forces in the removal of Joseph Koni [the LRA leader] and the LRA leadership from the battlefield”. Museveni, one of Africa's long-serving authoritarian rulers, was a one-time friend of Qaddafi. Qaddafi had extended support to the rebel army that brought Museveni to power in 1986. After coming to power, Museveni became one of the trusted allies of the West and was regularly feted at the White House.
At America's bidding, Uganda has sent peacekeepers to Somalia under the A.U. umbrella to keep the Islamist Al Shabab militia out of the capital, Mogadishu. Two years ago, Ethiopia despatched its troops to Somalia to drive away the Islamic Courts Union government from Mogadishu after it had managed to unite most of the country. In the face of immense resistance, the Ethiopian troops were withdrawn, but the country was left in chaos again. Al Shabab exploited this and now poses a potent threat to U.S. interests in the region.
In the middle of October, Kenya replicated what Ethiopia did. Encouraged by the U.S., it sent its troops deep into Somalia to fight Al Shabab. The U.S. is providing air support to the Kenyan military. The Kenyan invasion has already led to terror attacks in Kenyan cities. Only a handful of African states have bothered to send peacekeepers to the war-ravaged country, viewing the conflict there as one mainly instigated by the West.
Observers of the African scene are suspicious of the Obama administration's sudden decision to send Special Forces to Uganda. Obama has also indicated that the U.S. forces will be sent to the Central African Republic, the Democratic Republic of Congo and South Sudan, ostensibly to help the governments there to crush rebel groups. AFRICOM provides billions of dollars worth of equipment to the armies of countries that are friendly to the U.S. The U.S. military is already helping counter-insurgency operations in Mali and Niger, where the marginalised Tuareg ethnic group has raised the banner of revolt. “With Libya secure, an American invasion of Africa is under way,” observed John Pilger in a recent article.
The LRA, which operates along Uganda's borders with Southern Sudan and the Central African Republic, was never considered a serious threat in the 24 years that it has been active. It is said to have around 500 fighters, many of them child soldiers. Many African commentators suspect that the real goal of the Obama administration is to start preparing the ground for a permanent military base for AFRICOM on the continent. AFRICOM is currently headquartered in Stuttgart, Germany, but it has a major military facility in Camp Lemonier in Djibouti, a small state located in the Horn of Africa. In all, 1,800 American troops are permanently based there.
~~~~THE installation of the National Transitional Council (NTC) government in Libya by the... more
-
-
Well, I sincerly thought that the Western powers were going to steal the water, but David Dees seems to imply they merely poisoned it with depleted uranium.
***
Gaddafi's vision of pristine water and abundant food for Libya was the world's most wondrous, massive irrigation project, pulling ice age water from deep under the Sahara desert.
The forty-year achievement was destroyed by US-NATO depleted uranium nuclear bombs, poisoning the water in one of the most inhuman crimes of our age.Well, I sincerly thought that the Western powers were going to steal the water, but... more
-
-
GOOD wrap up on LIBYAN intervention by FP Mark Lynch:
'But for all those concerns, the intervention in Libya should be recognized as a success and real accomplishment for the international community. The NATO intervention did save Libya's protestors from a near-certain bloodbath in Benghazi. It did help Libyans free themselves from what was an extremely nasty, violent, and repressive regime. It did not lead to the widely predicted quagmire, the partition of Libya, the collapse of the NTC, or massive regional conflagration. It was fought under a real, if contestable, international legal mandate which enjoyed widespread Arab support. It did help to build -- however imperfectly and selectively -- an emerging international norm rejecting impunity for regimes which massacre their people. Libya's success did inspire Arab democracy protestors across the region. And it did not result in an unpopular, long-term American military occupation which it would have never seemed prudent to withdraw.'
http://tinyurl.com/5ut8ahsGOOD wrap up on LIBYAN intervention by FP Mark Lynch:
'But for all those... more
-
-
LOrion
-
added this
-
7 months ago
- |
-
Gaddafi's Real Crimes
Throughout his reign, Gaddafi insisted on a much larger (and fairer) share of his country's oil profits than multinational oil companies were used to accepting. Indeed, in a 2009 talk given to students at Georgetown University, Gaddafi threatened to kick Western oil companies out of Libya altogether by nationalising its oil and natural gas.
What is beyond dispute is that Gaddafi used his nation's oil wealth to turn Libya into the most progressive and modern of all African nations. In a 2007 African executive magazine it was noted that Libya, "unlike other oil producing countries such as Nigeria [where major Western oil companies have a stranglehold on the government], utilised the revenue from its oil to develop its country."
Gaddafi was also instrumental in establishing the African Union. He invested heavily and generously, to the tune of $6 billion, in many other African nations. Throughout Africa, hospitals, schools, hotels and roads bear Gaddafi's name as a sign of gratitude to the 'brutal dictator'. Libyan investments have helped to connect most of Africa by telephone, television, radio broadcasting, etc. Many major African companies, in which Gaddafi had invested via the 'Libya Arab Africa Investment Portfolio', now face financial ruin as Libyan oil money is diverted to the West under Libya's new rulers.
But undoubtedly the greatest threat posed by Gaddafi to NATO warmongers was his efforts to fast-track the creation of an African Monetary Fund and an African Central Bank and to establish the gold dinar as a pan-African currency (Libya has 144 tons of gold with a population of just 6 million, no external debt and $150 billion in cash reserves).
Gaddafi's idea was that African and Muslim nations would join together to create this new currency and use it to purchase oil and other resources to the exclusion of the dollar and other currencies. While a Russia Today report called it "an idea that would shift the economic balance of the world", Gaddafi's plans for a radical financial overhaul of African economies would undoubtedly have sounded the death knell for IMF looting of African economies, not to mention the 'CFA Franc', a colonial currency tied to the Euro and the French central bank and used in twelve formerly French-ruled African countries (hence the unbridled enthusiasm with which the French government joined the fray).
Writing in April 2011 for the London Evening Post, writer Jean-Paul Pougala had this to say about Gaddafi:
"For most Africans, Gaddafi is a generous man, a humanist, known for his unselfish support for the struggle against the racist regime in South Africa. If he had been an egotist, he wouldn't have risked the wrath of the West to help the ANC both militarily and financially in the fight against apartheid. This was why Mandela, soon after his release from 27 years in jail, decided to break the UN embargo and travel to Libya on 23 October 1997.
Mandela didn't mince his words when the former US president Bill Clinton said the visit was an 'unwelcome' one: "No country can claim to be the policeman of the world and no state can dictate to another what it should do." He added, "Those that yesterday were friends of our enemies have the gall today to tell me not to visit my brother Gaddafi, they are advising us to be ungrateful and forget our friends of the past."
Writing in September this year in the Guardian, Julian Borger and Terry Macalister pointed out that Western oil companies had planned to carve up Libyan oil before the so-called 'revolution'. Are we surprised? Is it mere coincidence that the NATO bombing campaign began on the 8th anniversary of the invasion of Iraq? The Egyptian uprising was more or less legitimate based on the psychopathic policies of a real 'brutal dictator' - Hosni Mubarak - who had brought millions of Egyptians to the brink of starvation. And take note how Mubarak was dealt with in comparison to Gaddafi. But no such conditions existed in socialist Libya.
The plain truth is that there was no widespread popular revolution against Gaddafi; there were only ever hired mercenaries, a well-orchestrated Western media campaign, which played out a script dictated to it from start to finish, heavy infiltration by military intelligence agents of the US and European countries, and NATO bombs. Lots of NATO bombs.
http://www.sott.net/articles/show/236679-Naked-Bloody-Imperialism-or-We-Came-We-Saw-He-Died-Gaddafi's Real Crimes
Throughout his reign, Gaddafi insisted on a much larger... more
-
-
John McCain's statements are making “less and less common sense,” Vladimir Putin's press-secretary Dmitry Peskov has said, commenting on the US senator's remarks that the Russian PM may be “nervous” after Gaddafi's death.
“We consider it is below our dignity to react to these words in any way,” Peskov told Interfax agency on Friday. The prime minister's press-secretary assumed that the American senator has apparently been “very tired.”
Earlier, the former Republican presidential candidate said in an interview with BBC that he believes that the events in Libya may make leaders of some other countries, including Putin, worried.
"It is the Spring, not just the Arab Spring," McCain said.
First Deputy Chairman of Russia's Communist Party's Central Committee and Deputy Speaker of the State Duma Ivan Melnikov believes Gaddafi's murder is a striking illustration of American and their NATO allies' policy in the North-African country.
“I think that the entire world should watch today the published photographs and video records of Gaddafi's murder. It is not just a dead former leader of Libya. It's the symbol of sovereignty of an independent country that was torn to pieces by Americans,” he told journalist on Friday, as cited by Interfax. He added that the US only interest was to put their hands on vast resources of the rich country and they do not care about Libya's future fate.
A similar thing was done in Iraq and its President Saddam Hussein, Melnikov noted.
“Back then some still had illusions about NATO and Americans' intentions. Now it is clear to everyone: it's a colonial barbarism performed on the 21st century scene,” the legislator stated.
http://rt.com/politics/mccain-putin-gaddafi-peskov-423/John McCain's statements are making “less and less common sense,”... more
-
-
-
-
LOrion
-
added this
-
7 months ago
- |
-
by Susan Lindauer ............ Hillary Clinton and President Sarkozy might loath to admit it, but the desire to turn back the clock on women rights in Libya constitutes one of the chief goals for NATO Rebels on the Transitional Council. For NATO Rebels—who are overwhelmingly pro-Islamist, regardless of NATO propaganda (see www.obamaslibya.com) — it's a matter of restoring social obedience to Islamic doctrine. However the abaya is more than a symbol of virtue and womanly modesty. It would usher in a full conservative doctrine, impacting women's rights in marriage and divorce, the rights to delay childbirth to pursue education and employment—all the factors that determine a woman's status of independence. That makes this one War Libya's women cannot afford to lose. .. http://www.makeahistory.com/index.php/recent-news/43014-why-western-woman-must-support-gaddafiby Susan Lindauer ............ Hillary Clinton and President Sarkozy might loath to... more
-
-
worrg
-
added this
-
8 months ago
- |
-
-
-
worrg
-
added this
-
8 months ago
- |
-
Chinese state backed hackers are not the only threat we are facing. The Russian Business Network and other foreign government-backed entities are falling from the radar as Chinese hackers take center stage. Lets not forget the lone hackers or hacktivist groups that are very active...
https://www.infosecisland.com/blogview/16526-NATO-Seeks-Cyber-Alliance-with-India.htmlChinese state backed hackers are not the only threat we are facing. The Russian... more
-
-
NTC rebels have apparently managed to do away with Muammar Gaddafi, and Ghana, among other African countries has, after a little hesitation, decided to do obeisance to the western powers by recognizing these anti-Gaddafi miscreants. The question now remains: does a post-Gaddafi Libya hope to become a land of milk and honey?
Believe me, that would be a very tall order because actually, whether you like Gaddafi or not, Libya, by all appreciable standards, had the highest standard of living in Africa, under Gaddafi. If western-style democracy was a yardstick for determining developmental success, Ghana, Nigeria and other countries in Africa would not be in their present predicaments. Let's take a look at some of the comforts and benefits Libyans enjoyed under Gaddafi and draw our own conclusions.
When Gaddafi took over, Libyans had an average annual income of about $60. His government brought Libya from poverty and debt to prosperity and debt-free status Education from the kindergarten stage through college was free. Health care was free as well. Under Gaddafi's oil-revenue-sharing program, each Libyan had $500 (five hundred US dollars) deposited into his or her bank account each month. After marriage, each couple was given as much as $60,000 (sixty thousand US dollars) to spend. Libya gave free land and seeds to anyone who wanted to take up farming as an
occupation.
Water and electricity were free in Libya. Petrol/fuel was sold at 75 cents a gallon under Gaddafi. There was virtually no homelessness as everyone was given a home. Undernourishment in Libya under Gaddafi was as low as 2% - a figure lower than that of the world center of "democracy," the USA. For any medical care or health treatments that were unavailable in Libya, the Libyan citizen's full expenses for travel, treatment and accommodation to wherever was required for treatment were borne by the Libyan government. Before Gaddafi, literacy in Libya was only 10%. Under Gaddafi's leadership, literacy has risen to over 80%. Unlike some Arab states, women in Libya under Gaddafi had equal rights; not only as a philosophy, but in practice......
Continue at:
http://news.peacefmonline.com/features/201109/68485.phpNTC rebels have apparently managed to do away with Muammar Gaddafi, and Ghana, among... more
-
-
The "rebels" have already trucked away Libya's gold which was not part of an international central bank, and now the heads of corporations are rubbing their greedy hands and fighting like vultures over how they will steal the rest of Libya's most precious resources: light sweet crude and pristine, non-chlorinated, unpolluted water.
Meanwhile, the fake humanitarian crisis/pretext for war has turned into a real humanitarian crisis as "rebels" slaugher black African migrant workers whom they declare to be pro-Gaddafi fighters.
****
Global demand for light, sweet crude is growing -- especially in emerging markets, where it is used for transportation fuel and as an alternative source for power generation. The return of Libyan crude to oil markets should ease oil prices, particularly for Brent crude.
The rebel movement, the National Transitional Council, has captured Tripoli and is preparing to establish a new government. Oil revenues will be crucial for the NTC, so the leadership will try to get wells flowing as soon as possible.
Getting Libyan crude oil back to market will not be easy, however. Security, law and order, and political stability must be ensured before international companies return. The NTC has largely pacified Tripoli, but there is continued resistance in Muammar al-Qaddafi's hometown of Sirte and in areas bordering Tunisia. Although Libya's tribes and factions came together to rise up against Qaddafi, they could fracture after the fighting is over, leading to renewed bloodshed. Indeed, there are already tensions. In July, Abdel Fatah Younes, a rebel commander, was assassinated, supposedly by another rebel faction.
Although many details remain unresolved, the NTC has already declared that Libya will honor its existing oil production contracts with international companies. For their part, the international oil companies have made encouraging noises about how quickly they could resume production. Eni, which produced some 270,000 barrels of oil per day total in Libya before the fighting, has suggested that it could restart operations quickly at its offshore facilities in the Pelagian Shelf basin and that it could reopen its onshore facilities in a matter of months, depending on damage assessments.The "rebels" have already trucked away Libya's gold which was not part... more
-
-
A photo collection of NATO backed "rebels" destroying Libya and prepping the nation for a wonderland of corporate looting of Libya's oil, water and gold.
As for the Libyan people who did not want to be bombed by Western-style democracy, they will now get to experience the same freedom that the Iraqis and Afghanis are now enjoying.A photo collection of NATO backed "rebels" destroying Libya and prepping the... more
-
