There is no cause to doubt that, for whatever reason, the support of the people of Sirte for Gadaffi is genuine. That this means they deserve to be pounded into submission is less obvious to me. The disconnect between the UN mandate to protect civilians while facilitating negotiation, and NATO’s actual actions as the anti-Gadaffi forces’ air force and special forces, is startling.
There is something so shocking in the Orwellian doublespeak of NATO on this point that I am severely dismayed. I suffer from that old springing eternal of hope, and am therefore always in a state of disappointment. I had hoped that the general population in Europe is so educated now that obvious outright lies would be rejected. I even hoped some journalists would seek to expose lies.
I was wrong, wrong, wrong.
The “rebels” are actively hitting Sirte with heavy artillery and Stalin’s organs; they are transporting tanks openly to attack Sirte. Yet any movement of tanks or artillery by the population of Sirte brings immediate death from NATO air strike.
What exactly is the reason that Sirte’s defenders are threatening civilians but the artillery of their attackers – and the bombings themselves – are not? Plainly this is a nonsense. People in foreign ministries, NATO, the BBC and other media are well aware that it is the starkest lie and propaganda, to say the assault on Sirte is protecting civilians. But does knowledge of the truth prevent them from peddling a lie? No.
It is worth reminding everyone something never mentioned, that UNSCR 1973 which established the no fly zone and mandate to protect civilians had
“the aim of facilitating dialogue to lead to the political reforms necessary to find a peaceful and sustainable solution;”
That is in Operative Para 2 of the Resolution
Plainly the people of Sirte hold a different view to the “rebels” as to who should run the country. NATO have in effect declared being in Gadaffi’s political camp a capital offence. There is no way the massive assault on Sirte is “facilitating dialogue”. it is rather killing those who do not hold the NATO approved opinion. That is the actual truth. It is extremely plain.
I have no time for Gadaffi. I have actually met him, and he really is nuts, and dangerous. There were aspects of his rule in terms of social development which were good, but much more that was bad and tyrannical. But if NATO is attacking him because he is a dictator, why is it not attacking Dubai, Bahrain, Syria, Burma, Zimbabwe, or Uzbekistan, to name a random selection of badly governed countries?
“Liberal intervention” does not exist. What we have is the opposite; highly selective neo-imperial wars aimed at ensuring politically client control of key physical resources.
Wars kill people. Women and children are dying now in Libya, whatever the sanitised media tells you. The BBC have reported it will take a decade to repair Libya’s infrastructure from the damage of war. That in an underestimate. Iraq is still decades away from returning its utilities to their condition in 2000.
I strongly support the revolutions of the Arab Spring. But NATO intervention does not bring freedom, it brings destruction, degradation and permanent enslavement to the neo-colonial yoke. From now on, Libyans like us will be toiling to enrich western bankers. That, apparently, is worth to NATO the reduction of Sirte to rubble.
Thanks Craig. Every day more and more ppl twig they’ve been conned, learn that the evidence for the intervention was fake, false of fiddled with, that NATO has massively breached the UN regs, charter and international laws, has bombed civilians in Benghazi at least 3 times, Tripoli continuously and other place s such as Sirte, Brega and many others, also bombed a green flag peace march recently.
I try to document what the MSM leaves out or lies about.
Khamis isn’t dead.
The army and Libyan gov’t supporters claim control of 70% of Libya. I would be unsurprised to learn that is true. Expect Tripoli to be returned to gov’t control within the week.
🙂
And what about Chavez causing JPM’s gold holdings to be proved non existent?
Letter to The Herald newspaper, 2/9/11:
Dear Editor,
I nearly fell off my chair when I read your editorial (2/9/11). You imply, firstly, that Iraq was invaded as “a natural reaction” to 9/11 and secondly, that Blair is “mistrusted” because of his supposed inconsistency over Ulster and
Iraq. May I point out that, one, Iraq did not ‘do’ 9/11 and two, that Blair is hated in the UK because he lied to Parliament and the nation and perverted the structures of governance to take Britain into an illegal war in which hundreds
of thousands (at least) of Iraqis and hundreds of British soldiers have died. We do not need more Neocon re-writes of recent history. Shame on you!
Yours sincerely,
Suhayl Saadi
http://www.thepeoplesvoice.org/TPV3/Voices.php/2011/09/02/libya-nato-s-latest-charnel-house
.
Whether or not one agrees with everything in this article, the issues to which it refers are not being discussed in the MSM.
Great letter Suhayl and sooo necessarry, these re writers of history, some highly regarded as venerable learned academics, is like a malodorous western exhaustion that has clouded our history like fog, for centuries, a genetic propensity almost, one that has self impregnated itself into the minds and spines of greedy and exploiting family dynasties, the self centred horders of riches, the war mongers who can’t get enough of what little is left.
Universities that teach american studies have a solemn anglo saxon thread running through their curricula, and history is slanted towards modernity, in disregard to the rich indigenous history that already existed, with very little recongition to an age old migration of people which then laid the cornerstone to today’s multicultural attempts, then in the most gory campaigns possible, as it is still the fact today.
When ever did the history and politics of this young infantile nation become more important than the history of Europe? How is it possible for us to orientate ourselfs to such a nation, forever, when we have perfectly working and well thought out societies staring us in the face here in Europe?
Does fatality and the alignment to failing ideas breed contempt for others who have solutions?
Thats what it seems like.
The last policy, we are still thinking about ‘three strikes and you’re out’, is our orientation to a private US health service, we can see that it has failed those who are old poor or too ill to be of economic value, who fall aside in a society determined by taylorismn, neverthelles we refuse to assess or look at better European examples, even if there are plenty to choose from.
Are City concerns clouding our judgments as to what’s best for us?
The wests record of nurturing peacefull accomodating societies is so blood red, that only the re writing of history, the slanting of facts and wholesale lying can now keep up this pretence of power and stability.
The emperor has realised he’s not wearing any cloth, now he’s angry and demands that we disrobe as well.
orgy time? 😉
This, another very telling article from the same site Suahyl, on Turkey’s resolve to inact plan B.
http://www.thepeoplesvoice.org/TPV3/Voices.php/2011/09/04/turkey-israeli-war-of-words#more18742
Thanks, Ingo, much appreciated. On Saturday morning (3/9/11), as well as e-mailing the letter to the Letters editor, I posted the letter in the comments section on The Herald’s website. At that time, there was one other comment there. Now I look and see another comment, posted on Sunday (4/9/11), but not mine. They moderate all comments if one is not known to them and this is the first time I’ve commented on their site, so that may explain the delay. Let’s see whether or not the comment appears on the site – or indeed whether or not the letter gets published in the hard copy of the newspaper.
@Clark (27 August 2011)
Sorry, no idea about the Indian video. You might try the Glasgow Media Group http://www.glasgowmediagroup.org/content/section/5/17/