Saturday, 26 March 2011
The so called military intervention "constitutes a gross manipulation
The very same criminal gang that have attacked Iraq&Afghanistan have today lauched one of the most catastophic military attack on a sovereign Libya
The very same criminal gang that have attacked Iraq and Afghanistan have today lauched one of the most catastophic military attack on a sovereign state( Libya)beginning what the open minded people believe will be yet another mass slaughter of innocent civilians.What is obvious to all but the most duped and apathetic is that once again we have another war launched by the imperialist powers thinly veiled as a “humanitarian intervention”,backed by an arm twisted UN resolution, dressed up as a mission of peace driven by the use of heavy bombardment and murder, where the truth lies diametrically opposed to the propaganda being pushed by the castrated capitalist mainstream media. Nothing is what it seems; the lies and deceptions are far dangerouse than the world may have thought.
The similarities with Iraq go well beyond the date of the opening salvo indeed, there are many consistencies between the current aggressive attack on Libya and numerous other military interventions and acts of aggression carried out by the US, NATO and their criminal allies in recent years.
Largely fabricated case for humanitarian intervention based on violence stoked by special forces troops and CIA,MI6 covert operations inside libya, with the consistent demonisation of the leader recast as a mass murdering tyrant to justify a heavy saturation bombing campaign in the name of human rights and justice. Any historical context that might cast the so-called “Allies” in a negative light for instance large-scale sales of weapons to the new enemy figure is carefully omitted from the narrative.
The imperialist aggressors are specifically responsible for the deaths of over a million civilians in Iraq and more than 70,000 in Afghanistan, which are downplayed by the term collateral damage.
The so called United Nations was formed by the nations that joined together against Germany in the Second World War. These countries formed a body called the Security Council, made themselves permanent members and granted themselves the power of veto ,such action is authocratic and illegal by democratic standard.The rest of the world were not part of that process during that time.The United Nations was formed in line with those three countries. That happened in the absence of some 165 countries, that is, one country was present and eight were absent.
If a country,like Libya for instance, were to exhibit military aggression against France or the United states, then the entire Organization would respond because France or the US is a sovereign State Member of the United Nations and the entire UN share the collective responsibility to protect the sovereignty of all nations. However, 65 aggressive wars have taken place since the formation of the UN without any United Nations action to prevent them.
Eight other massive, deadly wars, whose victims number some two to thress million civilians, have been waged by Member States that enjoy veto powers(US,Britain,France,Russia). Those countries that would want other countries to believe they seek to maintain the sovereignty and independence of peoples actually use military aggressive force against other sovereign states who are also member of the UN. Why would an open minded person believe that these aggressors want to work for peace and security of the world ?Instead they have resorted to aggressive wars and hostile behaviour. The US,Britian,France,Russia with the exception of China who was unanomously granted membership through UN voting process enjoy the veto they granted themselves as permanent members of the Security Council.
This intevention is illegal by all standard.
The so called military intervention "constitutes a gross manipulation" of the United Nations (UN) Charter and of the authority of the UN Security Council, and shows the "double standards which characterize its behavior."It is highly illegal from a realistic point of view
The "UN Resolution adopted by the Security Council does not authorize in any way these attacks on Libyan territory, which constitutes a violation of the international law,it is illegal by all standard.The war mongering cliq carrying out the military attacks against Libyan territory "have already started causing death, injury and suffering to innocent libyans and other civilian infrastructures.The events taking place in libya should not be a news to the conscious and the informed fellows,it's nothing new to me,because there are fundamental causes behind the strategy aimed at ruining Libya. Years ago, it was designated as a target by the architects of the "NEW WORLD ORDER"(NWO) , and the air raids against Libya were just a matter of time."
The question arising under this circumstances is: in the world of today, where force prevails over right, are there healthy political forces capable of preventing the devastation of yet another stable and prosperous country? I do believe that such forces exist.HELL is on earth.
The so called military intervention "constitutes a gross manipulation" of the United Nations (UN) Charter and of the authority of the UN Security Council, and shows the "double standards which characterize its behavior."It is highly illegal from a realistic point of view
The "UN Resolution adopted by the Security Council does not authorize in any way these attacks on Libyan territory, which constitutes a violation of the international law,it is illegal by all standard.The war mongering cliq carrying out the military attacks against Libyan territory "have already started causing death, injury and suffering to innocent libyans and other civilian infrastructures.
Seems it wont be wrong afterall to believe that the issue in Libya is far beyond "Qadhafi 42years dictatorship", though thats part of it and its being used to justify : protesters turned to armed to teeth rebels, france recognising the rebel government, seriously considering no-fly zone over Libya, arab league hypocritically or maybe self-servingly calling for no-fly zone over Libya for balance of power, imperialists disguisng their lust for Libyan Oil as humanitarian and democratiic champions. If we do our arithmetics, the losers remain Africa and Pan-Africanism. Outsiders can never love u more than u. Their are so many other peaceful avenue to reign in sit-tight dictators. Imperialist did not use it because they were benefitting from the dictators. Look at the mucky UK-Libya oil-related deal that led to release of Abdul-Basit Meghrahi? Look at the secret advances UK made to the rebels before their secret servicen were captured & locked up? Look at France's unilateral recognition of the rebel council? That one reminds me of the race at sharing Africa by the Imperialist in the olden days. Look at the fight for African slavery reparation? What happened to the champion? he die of America tea & hand-shake dem give him in Abuja Nigeria !
Attack on Libya is not new, the devils only used the situation in Arab word today to carried out their pre-planned agenda...................see the article that was written in 2002 by one of the British newspaper.......MI6 'halted bid to arrest bin Laden'
Startling revelations by French intelligence experts back David Shayler's alleged 'fantasy'about Gadaffi plot
Martin Bright , home affairs editor
The Observer, Sunday 10 November 2002 01.48 GMT
Article history
British intelligence paid large sums of money to an al-Qaeda cell in Libya in a doomed attempt to assassinate Colonel Gadaffi in 1996 and thwarted early attempts to bring Osama bin Laden to justice.
The latest claims of MI6 involvement with Libya's fearsome Islamic Fighting Group, which is connected to one of bin Laden's trusted lieutenants, will be embarrassing to the Government, which described similar claims by renegade MI5 officer David Shayler as 'pure fantasy'.
The allegations have emerged in the book Forbidden Truth , published in America by two French intelligence experts who reveal that the first Interpol arrest warrant for bin Laden was issued by Libya in March 1998.
According to journalist Guillaume Dasquié and Jean-Charles Brisard, an adviser to French President Jacques Chirac, British and US intelligence agencies buried the fact that the arrest warrant had come from Libya and played down the threat. Five months after the warrant was issued, al-Qaeda killed more than 200 people in the truck bombings of US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania.
The arrest warrant was issued in connection with the murder in March 1994 of two German anti-terrorism agents, Silvan and Vera Becker, who were in charge of missions in Africa. According to the book, the resistance of Western intelligence agencies to the Libyan concerns can be explained by MI6's involvement with the al-Qaeda coup plot.
The Libyan al-Qaeda cell included Anas al-Liby, who remains on the US government's most wanted list with a reward of $25 million for his capture. He is wanted for his involvement in the African embassy bombings. Al-Liby was with bin Laden in Sudan before the al-Qaeda leader returned to Afghanistan in 1996.
Astonishingly, despite suspicions that he was a high-level al-Qaeda operative, al-Liby was given political asylum in Britain and lived in Manchester until May of 2000 when he eluded a police raid on his house and fled abroad. The raid discovered a 180-page al-Qaeda 'manual for jihad' containing instructions for terrorist attacks.
The Observer has been restrained from printing details of the allegations during the course of the trial of David Shayler, who was last week sentenced to six months in prison for disclosing documents obtained during his time as an MI5 officer. He was not allowed to argue that he made the revelations in the public interest.
During his closing speech last week, Shayler repeated claims that he was gagged from talking about 'a crime so heinous' that he had no choice but to go to the press with his story. The 'crime' was the alleged MI6 involvement in the plot to assassinate Gadaffi, hatched in late 1995.
Shayler claims he was first briefed about the plot during formal meetings with colleagues from the foreign intelligence service MI6 when he was working on MI5's Libya desk in the mid-Nineties.
The Observer can today reveal that the MI6 officers involved in the alleged plot were Richard Bartlett, who has previously only been known under the codename PT16 and had overall responsibility for the operation; and David Watson, codename PT16B. As Shayler's opposite number in MI6, Watson was responsible for running a Libyan agent, 'Tunworth', who was was providing information from within the cell. According to Shayler, MI6 passed £100,000 to the al-Qaeda plotters.
The assassination attempt on Gadaffi was planned for early 1996 in the Libyan coastal city of Sirte. It is thought that an operation by the Islamic Fighting Group in the city was foiled in March 1996 and in the gun battle that followed several militants were killed. In 1998, the Libyans released TV footage of a 1996 grenade attack on Gadaffi that they claimed had been carried out by a British agent.
Shayler, who conducted his own defence in the trial, intended to call Bartlett and Watson as witnesses, but was prevented from doing so by the narrow focus of the court case.
During the Shayler trial, Home Secretary David Blunkett and Foreign Secretary Jack Straw signed Public Interest Immunity certificates to protect national security. Reporters were not able to report allegations about the Gadaffi plot during the course of the trial.
These restrictions have led to a row between the Attorney General and the so-called D-Notice Committee, which advises the press on national security issues.
The committee, officially known as the Defence, Press and Broadcasting Advisory Committee, has objected to demands by the prosecution to apply the Official Secrets Act retrospectively to cover information already pub lished or broadcast as a result of Shayler's disclosures. Members of the committee, who include senior national newspaper executives, are said to be horrified at the unprecedented attempt to censor the media during the trial.
Shayler claims Watson later boasted that there had been MI6 involvement in the Libyan operation. Shayler was also planning to call a witness to the conversation in which the MI6 man claimed British intelligence had been involved in the coup attempt.
According to Shayler, the woman, an Arabic translator at MI5, was also shocked by Watson's admission that money had been paid to the plotters.
Despite the James Bond myth, MI6 does not have a licence to kill and must gain direct authorisation from the Foreign Secretary for highly sensitive operations. Malcolm Rifkind, the Conservative Foreign Secretary at the time, has repeatedly said he gave no such authorisation.
It is believed Watson and Bartlett have been relocated and given new identities as a result of Shayler's revelations. MI6 is now said to be resigned to their names being made public and it is believed to have put further measures in place to ensure their safety.
A top-secret MI6 document leaked on the internet two years ago confirmed British intelligence knew of a plot in 1995, which involved five colonels, Libyan students and 'Libya veterans who served in Afghanistan'.
Ashur Shamis, a Libyan expert on radical Islam said: 'There was a rise in the activities of the Islamic Fighting Group from 1995, but many in Libya would be shocked if MI6 was involved.'
They can never love Africa more than Africans
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment