Muammar al-Quathafi’s Death And Obama’s Shame

-A +A
0

President Obama you stained yourself with the blood of innocent Libyans in this shameful display of political hypocrisy. This was an opportunity to earn that Nobel Peace Prize you have on your wall. Dr. King must be turning in his grave.

[Speaking Truth To Power]

Last week, another ignoble chapter in America’s foreign policy was reached with the death of Libyan leader Colonel Muammar al-Quathafi.

Western leaders, if they had any conscience, would be ashamed of their deceitful, duplicitous conduct and the death and needless destruction they caused by unleashing NATO armaments to back one side in Libya’s civil war.

President Barack Obama -- and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton-- should be ashamed too.

Last Thursday, Colonel Muammar al-Quathafi was executed after his convoy was hit by a NATO missile strikes in his hometown of Sirte in northern Libya. Quathafi, apparently, tried to flee and was, reportedly, shot in both legs. Some reports say he was killed near a drainage ditch, presumably, from a shot to the head. Evidence suggests the former leader was beaten before being assassinated.

The whereabouts of the Libyan leader had been unknown since August, after the NATO-backed armed insurrectionists overran the Libyan capital of Tripoli. After almost a month of shelling Sirte, the “rebels” captured the city and also defeated Quathafi loyalists in the city of Bani Walid. Quathafi's, Mutassim, was also killed, after being captured alive. Colonel Quathafi had ruled Libya since the bloodless 1969 coup that deposed King Idris Sanussi.

Speaking in the White House’s Rose Garden, President Obama said, “Today, the government of Libya announced the death of Muammar Qaddafi. This marks the end of a long and painful chapter for the people of Libya, who now have the opportunity to determine their own destiny in a new and democratic Libya. For four decades, the Qaddafi regime ruled the Libyan people with an iron fist. Basic human rights were denied. Innocent civilians were detained, beaten and killed….Faced with the potential of mass atrocities -- and a call for help from the Libyan people -- the United States and our friends and allies stopped Qaddafi’s forces in their tracks.”

The United States and their “friends” and “allies”—like those NATO warmongers—surely did liquidate Colonel Quathafi. That much is true. However, the notion this military mission was done for the altruistic reasons of "saving Libyan lives" is a gross perversion of the truth. The fact is this was about regime change and the geopolitics of oil.

President Obama and his Western buddies can pretend all they want that the removal of Quathafi was somehow sanctioned by the masses of the Libyan people. But nothing can be further from the truth. Sure, there are Libyans who despised Quathafi, but the idea that a majority of Libyans were against him has never been conclusively proven, despite the warped reporting of compromised corporate media outlets. Benghazi, historically the seat of King Idriss, was almost distinct from Tripoli, as was Misurata, as the country's framework is based on "tribal" allegiances.

In the end, history will note that it was the West who removed Quathafi from power with NATO’s bombardment—not the so-called “rebels,” or anything remotely resembling a consensus of the Libyan people. In that respect, Quathafi’s fall is nothing like the legitimate removals of rulers the world witnessed in Tunisia and Egypt, where the masses—non-violently—were the ones who eliminated these leaders.

As I’ve pointed out before, these “rebels” who launched armed insurrection against the Libyan government—from day one—have ties to Al-Qaeda. The Sinjar Records, which were analyzed at West Point Military Academy, show that. These are religious zealots. Does the West really think Libyans will be better off under the rule of these people?

The demise of Quathafi is a political boon for President Obama, especially after the death of Osama bin Laden and the recent predator drone execution of Anwar al-Awlaki in Yemen. Political pundits are now speaking in glowing terms about the president’s foreign policy successes. Killing “enemies over there” seems to be the primary foreign policy goal of American politicians—along with exploiting the natural resources, like oil, of others.

On Friday, the president told America the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are winding down. But how are we to interpret the ongoing saber-rattling against Iran? Some will justify this with talk of the, alleged, plot, reportedly by Iran, to kill the Saudi Arabian ambassador to the U.S. Apparently, when American politicians want to kill someone, who cares about things like conclusive evidence?

The Obama White House and Western “allies” like British Prime Minister David Cameron and French President Nicholas Sarkozy, who initiated this imperial intervention, talk about fostering democratic change in Libya. Question: if the West cares about democracy why support the most despotic regimes on the planet? People need to ask question and refuse to be fooled.

Saudi Arabia has one of the worst human rights record in the world. This is a country where they behead people—and not just for capital offences. Had it not been for the heavy American military presence there the Saudi people would have probably toppled these tyrants already.

Why is there no call for regime-change in Saudi Arabia? The same is true for Yemen’s President Ali Abdullah Saleh, who has ruled for 33 years. Why aren’t Western countries trying to help the Yemeni people remove him from power? Hasn’t he been attacking the Yemeni people? What about the brutes in Bahrain’s government, who with the help of Saudi Arabia, arrested, tortured and killed protesters?

The dossier of dictators America and the West support is too long to list here.

President Obama if you care about innocent civilians, how do you explain your silence towards the slow genocide policy of the Israeli government against Palestinians? Aren’t you ashamed of supporting those who control every aspect of the lives of Palestinians, who’ve been made prisoners in the land of their forefathers?

The Libyan imperialist intervention is yet another example of why the rest of the world has good reason to question the credibility of Western and American politicians. It’s obvious this war was about oil. Was it also about establishing a new neo-colonialist interventionist template connected to AFRICOM? That’s very likely.

President Obama argues that the Arab League, and others, backed this intervention. Question: what were the president’s, and the West’s, rationale for rejecting the peace plan brokered by the African Union? Wasn’t an opportunity to spare civilian lives lost when that plan was rapidly rebuffed?

President Obama you stained yourself with the blood of innocent Libyans in this shameful display of political hypocrisy. This was an opportunity to earn that Nobel Peace Prize you have on your wall. Dr. King must be turning in his grave.

comments@blackstarnews.com

"Speaking Truth To Empower."


Also Check Out...

FRENCH FIRM LOSES BID TO OWN
Living in the City
El Puente Artists And Los Sures
TNC's Fifth "Dream Up
LIBERIANS RALLY IN RESPONSE TO
NIGERIAN COMIC TURNS ON FANS