|Following the standard US playbook, the Obama regime and its accomplices made up crimes to propagandize their populations into accepting illegal aggression and terrorism against Libya in 2011, and now ignore the actual crimes being committed in the Libya shoved, by the West, into “the abyss”.
Journalist Patrick Cockburn noted the fabrications “that were used to fuel popular support for the air war in the US, Britain, France and elsewhere”:
Human rights organisations … discovered that there was no evidence for several highly publicised atrocities supposedly carried out by Gaddafi's forces…Cockburn further notes that, after lying to fabricate the pretext for aggression, the Western governments and media outlets have fallen mysteriously silent on Libya as the country has spiraled into oblivion. The West thus again all but insists we notice that humanitarian crises play no role in drawing their attention, and that they only trumpet – or invent – human rights violations to cover Western aggression, which is carried out, Cockburn notes, “always in the interests of the country intervening.”
The West immediately lost its feigned concern over the “human rights” violations it exaggerated or simply made up regarding Libya because they were never of concern to begin with, and the West made things much worse: the illegal US-led attack instantly killed or led to the deaths of up to hundreds of thousands .
Since then, Cockburn documents,
[W]arring militias [have] reduce[d] Libya to primal anarchy in which nobody is safe…Of these “militias”, Washington's Blog noted in April that they were:
… largely comprised of Al Qaeda terrorists .And:
The United States … knowingly facilitat[ed] the provision of weapons to known al-Qaeda militias and figures ,' Clare Lopez … former CIA officer, told MailOnline.Cockburn continues:
The majority of Libyans are demonstrably worse off today than they were under Gaddafi…It is well known that the Obama regime simply continued the leaked Bush Jr. agenda to “take out” Libya and six other countries.
But the Bush agenda was also a continuation of longstanding US policy. The US, immediately after World War II, made internal plans to try to dominate the resources of the Middle East.
Specifically, for a few examples, the US commenced terrorist operations to try to overthrow and install a puppet in Syria in 1948, Iran in 1953 (which it did successfully until 1979), and since the 1930s has been closely partnered with the terrorist organization ruling Saudi Arabia.
The US has been engaged in terrorist operations against Libya since at least 1986, when the US carried out “ the major single terrorist act” of the year when it planted and detonated explosives there, attempting to assassinate Gaddafi but succeeding only in killing his daughter and many others.
With the “ leading terrorist state “, the US, caging more women than any other country, cracking down on speech, supporting the mass rapist Mubarak of Egypt for thirty years, through 2011, then transitioning to supporting the new mass rapist Sisi in Egypt now, along with scores of other terrorist regimes, one must look beyond official propaganda to determine why the US overthrew Gaddafi.
Taking into account that the US decided long ago to try to dominate the largely Mid East-based and global oil economy (as it earlier had decided to dominate cotton), US actions can be understood by using Syria's Assad as an analogy.
In trying to control Syria, what would Assad prefer: for any existing opposition to be strong and united against him, or for it to consist of disparate, disorganized, weak factions mostly battling and killing each other, if anyone?
The answer is obvious. We can then extend the analogy to the US (while remembering that the US formerly used Assad as an ally in the US global torture network ).
In trying to dominate the world's oil market – and the world in general – what would the “leading terrorist state” prefer: unified, strong opposition or weak, small, disparate, warring factions killing and wiping each other out?
Again, the answer is obvious, so we can move on to asking: since “Gaddafi's overthrow was very much Nato's doing” (Cockburn), what was Libya before 2011 when it was destroyed by the US-led NATO terrorist network?
Harvard research scholar Garikai Chengu, on October 19, published a report called “Libya: From Africa's Richest State Under Gaddafi, to Failed State After NATO Intervention”.
In 1967 Colonel Gaddafi inherited one of the poorest nations in Africa; however, by the time he was assassinated, Gaddafi had turned Libya into Africa's wealthiest nation .Libya, it appears, was, indeed, an outstandingly strong source of opposition to Western domination of the region, as well as a “threat of a good example” for successfully carrying out policies hated by the USA, such as free healthcare, electricity, and education.
In one particularly egregious move, Gaddafi had even allied with Nelson Mandela in the fight against Apartheid, while the US, particularly Ronald Reagan, strongly supported and fought hard to maintain Apartheid, including by imprisoning Mandela and putting him on the US “terrorist” list (while taking Saddam Hussein off) until Bush Jr. finally changed Mandela's classification in 2008. Reagan and US efforts to topple Gaddafi were thus integral to the US white supremacist jihad to maintain Apartheid.
Indeed, to ask “Why Libya?” is to ask “Why anywhere?”
Chengu notes of “Western intervention in … Libya, Iraq, and Syria”:
…prior to western military involvement in these three nations, they were the most modern and secular states in the Middle East and North Africa with the highest regional women's rights and standards of living.As confirmation, the 2014 UN Development Report also found, as Patrick Martin notes:
The steepest decline in living conditions during 2013 occurred in Central African Republic, Libya and Syria—three countries targeted by US and French imperialism for military intervention and political subversion.
When we mute Western government and integrated corporate propaganda (what they say) and look at what they actually do, what is left? The bare reality of a brutal Western terror axis butchering, as it always has, any group of people that could potentially deter Western domination and thus cut into the percentage of global wealth captured by Western predators.
Depressing, but Carl Herman nicely expresses how we can deal with this.
Robert Barsocchini is a researcher focusing on global force dynamics. He also writes professionally for the film industry. Also see his free e-book, Whatever it Takes – Hillary Clinton's Record of Support for War and other Depravities .