Post-Mortem: The West's Ugly War On Libya

-A +A
0

Thanks to The Wall Street Journal, which broke ranks with other corporate media outlets such as The New York Times and CNN, we found out that the rebels committed war crimes and crimes against humanity; with the assistance of air cover provided by the NATO bombardments.

[Black Star News Editorial]

Part One of a Series

Muammar al-Quathafi is dead but the Libyan war of aggression exposed the hypocrisy of Western governments as well as major newspapers.

The war also destroyed the credibility of the United Nations organization and the International Criminal Court. These entities can still pretend to take themselves seriously; but the naked truth has been exposed to all the world.

The Libyan war of aggression was a very sordid and ugly affair. What started as an uprising against al-Quathafi, who had indeed been in office for way too long --he was popular after he had deposed King Idris Sanussi, modernized the nation and spent billions of oil dollars on the infrastructure and education-- was quickly hijacked by Washington, Paris and London.

So, today, which countries are the worst abusers and violators of United Nations Resolutions? Clearly, the United States, France, and the United Kingdom. Resolution 1973 was intended to enforce a no-fly zone in Libya and to protect civilians from all combatant in the civil war. A Google search will reveal that NATO initially claimed the insurgent would also be punished with air-strikes should they abuse civilians. This statement was merely for public relations consumption.

Instead, NATO promptly became the air forces of the insurgents, taking sides in the civil war and staffing the Libyan army. NATO never took any action against the insurgents even though they committed far worse abuses than any that were committed by al-Quathafi's forces.

Thanks to The Wall Street Journal, which broke ranks with other corporate media outlets such as The New York Times and CNN, we found out that the rebels committed war crimes and crimes against humanity; with the assistance of air cover provided by the NATO bombardments. For its expose --from a newspaper better known for business reporting-- The Wall Street Journal deserves a Pulitzer Prize for foreign news reporting, hands down.

The Journal informed the world that the rebels ethnically-cleansed the city of Misurata of its Black population and even issued a bounty for Black people. The units that carried out the crimes was "The Brigade to Purge Slaves, black skin," according to a Wall Street Journal article of June 21, 2011.

Subsequently, the U.S.- , U.K.-, and French-, and NATO-assisted rebels attacked the city of Tawargha and depopulated it of its 35,000 Black residents. The homes were looted and burned down and on the walls, the insurgents from Misurata, who are darlings of The New York Times --on several occasions the newspaper has described their fighting skills as "legendary"-- scribbled the words "slaves"  and "negroes" on the walls of the burned homes, The Wall Street Journal reported on September 13, 2011.

This campaign of ethnic cleansing of Black people must have embarrassed The New York Times, one of the world's supposedly major newspapers, when it was exposed by The Wall Street Journal.

After all, The New York Times had championed the cause of the insurgents, even publishing articles about false accounts --including those alleging that al-Quathafi had bombed his own people with planes during the initial stages of the uprising and that his army had also launched a campaign of mass rapes with the use of Viagra pills. Later, the newspaper published editorials urging the Obama administration to increase its role in the war against Libya and urging NATO to intensify the bombing campaigns.

After The Wall Street Journal exposed the Misurata atrocities, The New York Times did what all good newspapers do; it pretended as if the insurgents were not committing war crimes of ethnic cleansing. Reporting on the crimes would have exposed the rebels for who they really were; sadistic killers, including anti-Black racists and radical anti-Western Islamists, such as Abdelhakim Belhadj, a former al-Qaeda fighter, who today is the military commander of Tripoli; thanks to NATO.

At some point the pretense of intervening to "protect civilians" stopped and NATO intensified bombing, hitting even civilian targets.  After President Obama, President Nicholas Sarkozy, and Prime Minister David Cameron wrote an Op-Ed article saying al-Quathafi "must go" and "go for good" NATO started bombing the Libyan ruler's residence, killing a son and grandchildren.

France then violated United Nations Resolution 1970, which banned the shipment of arms into Libya. Sarkozy, who hopes "victory" in Libya will earn him a second presidential term, ordered air drops of weapons into Western Libya.

In time, Tripoli fell after months of merciless NATO bombardment. Qatar, which according to The Wall Street Journal had sent in 18 cargo jets filled with arms to the Islamist units of the insurgency, also sent ground troops for the invasion of the Libyan capital. Then it was just a matter of mopping up. On Tuesday, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was in Tripoli. On Thursday, Muammar al-Quathafi had been executed. He had been captured in his home town of Sirte. He was reportedly wounded during a NATO air-strike --presumably NATO was still "protecting" innocent civilians.

Quathafi was then shot in the head and killed by his captors. It might have been a matter of victor's summary justice; or perhaps an order came from somewhere, since the Libyan did know many secrets about his dealings with the West.

In any event, the demand made in the Op-Ed article by Obama, Sarkozy and Cameron that al-Quathafi must "go for good" had now been accomplished.

In the process, the U.S., France and U.K., made a total mockery of the United Nations and utterly destroyed any remaining credibility that the organization possesed. If Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon had any moral compass at all he would resign and tell the world he wants no part of the charade.



Editor's Note: Now that Muammar al-Quathafi has been deposed and killed as The New York Times advocated for, it's time for readers to revisit the ethnic cleansing of Black Libyans campaign carried out by the U.S.- and NATO-backed NTC insurgents. Ethnic cleansing is a war crime and crime against humanity by any definition. PLEASE call (212) 556-1234 ( hit "0" to get operator) and ask for Joe Kahn, The New York Times' foreign news editor and call back and then ask for Arthur Sulzberger, the publisher. Ask them both when The New York Times will (1) do follow up stories on the ethnic cleansing of Black Libyans and (2) when the newspaper plans to write editorials denouncing the ethnic cleansing and calling for an investigation by the United Nations and investigation and prosecution by the International Criminal Court. Ironically, The New York Times might have made the determination that if a Black U.S. President was not going to deplore the ethnic cleansing of Black Libyans, then the newspaper also go ignore it. How perverted would that be?


"Speaking Truth To Empower."


Also Check Out...

NYPD AGREES TO PANIC BUTTONS,
NYC CELEBRATES FIRST WEEKEND
NAN HONORS PRESTIGIOUS CELEBRITIES
POLICE INVESTIGATE MOTIVE BEHIND
ACTRESS VIVICA FOX DISCUSSES HER
FORMER PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA