Presidente Bashar al-Assad: “le circostanze che la Siria si trova ad attraversare, richiedono massimo coraggio, forza e responsabilità”.
Il presidente Bashar al-Assad domenica ha detto che “le particolari circostanze che il nostro paese sta attraversando ci richiedono di essere più coraggiosi, forti e responsabili”.
“Rendiamo omaggio e onoriamo le anime dei martiri innocenti, civili e militari” ha detto il presidente al-Assad rivolto all’Assemblea del popolo in occasione della sua prima legislatura, aggiungendo che il sangue dei martiri non verrà sprecato.
Il presidente al-Assad ha dichiarato: “Svolgere il vostro dovere di direzione legislativa non può essere fatto in modo migliore se non in possesso di una chiara visione dello sviluppo basato sul dialogo costruttivo e la comunicazione con i cittadini”, aggiungendo di concentrarsi sul ruolo di controllo dell ‘Assemblea, che non deve ignorare il suo ruolo di collaborazione con il potere esecutivo.
“Dobbiamo affrontare gran parte della campagna contro la Siria basandoci sulle riforme e per la costruzione di una fortezza con cui fronteggiare le ambizioni regionali e internazionali”.
“E’ nostro dovere, nei confronti del nostro popolo, che ha dimostrato la capacità di riuscire a superare prove nazionali molto difficili, adeguare il nostro impegno al livello della sua consapevolezza e fermezza”.
Il Presidente ha sottolineato che lo svolgimento delle elezioni dell’Assemblea del Popolo, come previsto, è uno schiaffo in faccia a chi vuole che la Siria si chiuda su se stessa e anneghi nel sangue della propria gente.
Il presidente al-Assad ha dichiarato: “Un anno e mezzo dopo che la crisi è iniziata, le cose sono divenute chiare e le maschere sono state rimosse … il ruolo internazionale in ciò che sta avvenendo oggi è evidente da decenni ormai … il colonialismo rimane invariato, ma i suoi metodi e le facce cambiano, gli attori regionali si svelano per quel che sono”.
Egli ha aggiunto che “dopo tutto il sangue puro che è stato versato, abbiamo bisogno di ragionarci su molto bene e di apprendere dalle persone le quali furono in grado di decodificare il complotto sin dall’inizio.”
Il presidente al-Assad ha dichiarato: “Stiamo progredendo con l’evoluzione del processo politico, ma il terrorismo si sta intensificando”.
“Non saper distinguere tra processo politico e terrorismo è un grave sbaglio, che garantisce legittimità al terrorismo. La separazione tra terrorismo e processo politico è essenziale per giungere alla soluzione della crisi”.
“Siamo di fronte ad una vera e propria guerra, ed occuparsi di guerra è diverso dall’affrontare questioni interne. Se boicottiamo le elezioni, boicottiamo le persone. E qualsiasi processo politico che non si basi sul volere popolare non ha alcun valore”.
“Sapevamo sin dal primo giorno che la pista politica non avrebbe portato ad una soluzione della crisi, ma lo abbiamo fatto, perché il popolo siriano ne ha bisogno, indipendentemente dalla crisi”.
Ha poi aggiunto: “La Siria è aperta a chi vuole una vera riforma e un dialogo onesto, accogliamo con favore la partecipazione di qualsiasi siriano onesto al processo di sviluppo del Paese”.
Il Presidente ha sottolineato che la sicurezza nazionale è una linea rossa invalicabile e che non si può essere tolleranti con chi tenti di sabotarla.
Il presidente al-Assad ha proseguito dicendo che “il caos porta solo altro caos, ma la società può essere costruita solo sulla base di elevate norme etiche”. Ha poi aggiunto: “I problemi non sono causati dalle riforme o dalla democrazia, ma dal voler minare il ruolo della Siria nei confronti della Resistenza, il suo sostegno alla Resistenza e la sua adesione e supporto ai diritti della resistenza”.
“Non c’è giustificazione per il terrorismo, sotto qualsiasi pretesto esso si presenti, e non c’è nessuna tolleranza per esso o per coloro che lo sostengono, a meno che non si arrendano. La differenza nei punti di vista può significare ricchezza, ma le differenze circa il concetto di Patria possono significare distruzione”.
Ha poi aggiunto: “Io non sto parlando di agenti interni o di cospiratori esterni, ma piuttosto vorrei ammonire quei siriani che amavano il proprio paese, ma non sapendo come difenderlo, inavvertitamente hanno contribuito a minarlo”.
“Dobbiamo distinguere tra il nebulosità politica e quella nazionale, in quanto la foschia nazionale è inaccettabile. Quando il problema è di carattere nazionale, io sono certamente con il mio paese”, ha detto il Presidente.
Ha aggiunto che nessuna istituzione sarebbe potuta essere in grado di fare sacrifici, così come le forze armate hanno fatto, se non fosse esistita una gran fede a dirigere i suoi membri nella giusta direzione.
“Gli errori commessi da alcuni individui, di volta in volta sono stati sfruttati ed esagerati per fare apparire tutto come una prassi adottata dallo Stato e dalle sue istituzioni in generale,” ha detto.
Il presidente al-Assad ha aggiunto: “Le nostre Forze Armate hanno costruito la patria e hanno sempre conservato la sua indipendenza. A nessuno è permesso di minare un simbolo che rappresenta la nostra unità e la dignità”.
“Questa non è una crisi interna, ma una guerra guidata dall’estero attraverso strumenti interni, ed ognuno è responsabile nel difendere la propria Patria”.
Il presidente al-Assad: “Se noi oggi ci manteniamo uniti, io vi confermo che la fine di questa situazione arriverà presto, a prescindere dalla cospirazione straniera. Noi non permetteremo, a coloro i quali non hanno nulla a che fare con la nostra storia, di scrivere qualcosa che non è stato mai scritto prima nella storia, cioè che i siriani hanno distrutto la propria patria da se stessi”.
Il Presidente ha continuato dicendo: “Dobbiamo lavorare insieme per realizzare le esigenze dei cittadini riguardo la giustizia sociale, che è rappresentata da una giusta distribuzione delle risorse, da una parità nelle opportunità ed nell’ottenere i servizi basilari”.
Il presidente al-Assad ha dichiarato: “Oggi noi stiamo disegnando, con le braccia dei cittadini onorevoli, con le istituzioni nazionali e con il coraggio del nostro esercito, le linee di una vittoria inevitabile”.
“Anche se alcune fazioni hanno prodotto morte e distruzione al nostro popolo, noi vogliamo presentare alla loro gente un modello civile da seguire, al fine di ottenere la propria libertà ed essere conpartecipi della propria Patria, ed invece che i leaders essere proprietari delle terre, che le persone e la patria lo siano”, ha aggiunto.
Il presidente al-Assad ha dichiarato: “Il terrorismo non spezzerà la volontà del popolo siriano e la Siria rimarrà per sempre una fortezza inespugnabile, che resterà a testimonianza della sconfitta dei suoi nemici”.
Egli ha sottolineato che la sovranità della Siria, la sua autonoma capacità decisionale, la sua sicurezza territoriale e la dignità della sua gente, saranno sempre le linee guida da seguire.
Traduzione e adattamento in lingua italiana a cura di
Filippo Fortunato Pilato (Syrian Free Press)
|Des sites internet ont diffusé des images sur des « enchères » dans l’un des hôtels de Jeddah en Arabie Saoudite pour acheter des mercenaires en échange de grosses sommes d’argent en vue de les envoyer en Syrie pour s’y faire exploser.
Dans ladite vidéo, un certain Abou Salah accepte de vendre son fils à un million de riyals saoudiens. En contrepartie, le jeune doit partir en Syrie pour commettre un attentat suicide !
Le responsable de ces enchères a ouvert la session des ventes aux enchères par une somme de 200 mille riyals saoudiens et a demandé ensuite au public de faire des donations afin d’acheter le suicidaire.
Il incitait le public à multiplier les sommes d’argent proposées.
A la fin de la session, l’un des participants accepte de payer un million de riyals saoudiens, alors que le père du suicidaire affiche sa joie pour cette grosse somme d’argent et crie : Allah Akbar ! (Dieu est le Plus grand).
Le responsable de ces enchères a fait savoir que le suicidaire sera envoyé à Bab Amr à Homs pour aider les hommes armés de l’opposition syrienne.
Published on Monday, March 12, 2012 by Common Dreams
I Don’t Want To See Their Faces; I Don’t Want To Hear Them Scream
The whole thing is regrettable, really. Shocking, truth to tell. And so sad, I’m sure, for those people, those blanket-wearing, beard-growing, false-god-worshiping, probably-related-to-terrorists, citizens of Afghanistan whose wives and children and babies were gunned down in their beds, shot, murdered, slaughtered, and then burned by one of America’s finest Sunday morning. But hey, what are ya gonna do? These things happen.
It seems the soldier in question was not, in fact, representative of our brave fighting men and women. He was just another in the continuing series of lone gunmen who have been shooting up the world here and overseas for as long as any of us have been reading the newspapers. David Cortright, the director of policy studies at Notre Dame’s Kroc Institute for International Peace Studies, tells us “This may have been the act of a lone, deranged soldier.” I saw a headline that said he was a rogue. OK; rogues do as often as not, “go rogue” as no less an authority than Sarah Palin would have us know. So given time to reflect a bit, I guess I’m sorry I impugned our noble troops.
President Barack Obama summed it up as succinctly and as eloquently as only a man of his unflappably cool reserve could, I suppose: “This incident is tragic and shocking, and does not represent the exceptional character of our military and the respect that the United States has for the people of Afghanistan.” Well there. And yer goddamn right, Mr. President. Our boys kick butt! We take it to ‘em! We light up the friggin sky! They don’t mess with the U.S.A. and get away with it. You don’t kill three thousand brave American heroes on September the eleventh, ten years ago, and expect your four year old girl to sleep in her own bed unmolested. Unkilled. Unburned. We do what needs to be done to keep America free, and sometimes along the way an enlisted man goes a little nuts. Just one. Just every little once in a while.
Mr. Obama got right on the telephone and called up our “partner” in this whole great reworking of Afghanistan, Mr. Hamid Karzai, and told him we were sorry. Or something like that. He expressed condolences. So did Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta. I’m sure those were awkward conversations, but you know, the buck does stop there, and that’s why we pay those boys the long dollar. Speaking of which, compensation will be paid. You betcha. We have a formula. I don’t know, fifteen hunnerd bucks or so. Each.
And we’re even-handed and generous in spraying our condolences and compensations. When we kill civilians as a part of our regularly scheduled, officially sanctioned, presidentially authorized drone strikes, it makes Mr. Obama sad, too. It is regrettable, of course, that so many children will insist on living in the same hovels as the alleged terrorists we need to kill, or with somebody who kind of looks like one of them or who might once have been associated with them in some way. We were attacked, you know, and candidate Obama said his predecessor wasn’t prosecuting the Afghanistan adventure vigorously enough, but he would, and he for sure, by God has, hasn’t he?
Does it feel different to be dead by drone than dead by M-1? Does Obama have nightmares? Did Bush? Do they wash their hands, trying to scrub off the blood? We do not doubt this particular atrocity was perpetrated by a young man gone leave of his senses, but we are not encouraged that he will be tried in a military court, found crazy, demoted, dismissed, given cursory mental health treatment and some time in an institution. We wonder if our Congress and our President should be pronounced crazy, too. Or maybe just criminal. And what about us, neighbor, in our complicity? We who elected them and will re-elect them or others just as cold and cruel and as able to calculate that the life of an Afghan child is not worth much compared to our unending and unyielding compulsion to exercise extreme power in pursuit of God only knows what.
Has anybody thought to ask Barbara Bush about this situation? You’ll remember she said the victims of Hurricane Katrina the New Orleans cops herded into the Superdome (those they didn’t shoot) so they could sweat and starve and suffer among piles of shit and debris for several days, had a pretty good deal: “And so many of the people in the arena here, you know, were underprivileged anyway, so this—this [chuckle] is working very well for them.”
OK! You’re way ahead of me here, aren’t ya buddy? Take Mr. Samad Khan, a farmer who lost all 11 members of his family: wife, kids, maybe an old mom or a crippled dad, for all I know. Eleven times even a thousand dollars each will net him eleven grand. And I’ll bet Afghanistan doesn’t even tax dead baby compensation income. Do we pro-rate babies and old people?
Hell, old Mrs. Bush wouldn’t really have any problem with the midnight murder run itself (yeah, I know, it was three a.m., but I can’t pass a chance at a cheap alliteration without hooking it any more than Lieutenant Calley could leave a peasant hut un-incinerated). Sure, she was talking about her boy’s Iraq adventure, but the emotion is surely transferable: “Why should we hear about body bags and deaths? Oh, I mean, it’s not relevant. So why should I waste my beautiful mind on something like that?” A precious thing for sure, you bloated old bag; don’t waste it. Aw, Jesus! That wasn’t nice. I’m sorry, Mrs. Bush. My deepest condolences over the condition of your mind. Fuck, I’m sorry about your whole stupidfamily.
But I’m not here to “look backward.” President Obama told us years ago there’d be none of that. And I’m not going to beat up Republicans. Why no less a liberal figure than Bill Clinton’s Secretary of State, Madeline Albright, said that, while it did seem a hard choice to make, she believed the deaths of half a million children in Iraq was a worthwhile price to pay to get old Saddam. So five hundred thousand, compared to a dozen or so….
And it’s Monday, anyhow, and back to work, you know, and the weather looks good and the economy is incrementally better (experts say) and the job creators are working darned hard to create jobs for bums like you and me; gas isn’t as expensive as it might be, all things considered, and President Obama will probably get those lunatic Israelis to hold off bombing Iran until after he’s re-elected (they can kill all the Palestinians they like, of course, because they’re just, well, Palestinians for Christ’s sake.) So this will fade away about as fast as that Koran burning did, don’t you think?
But before we move on, why don’t you do what I did this evening? Google around the WWW and stir up some photographs. Do it on your desktop if you still own one—the portables, the notebooks, the smart phones the cool kids all flash just don’t give you the big picture. You might find the AP photo captioned “Anar Gul points to the body of her grandchild.” You could see eight pictures the New York Times has assembled into a little slideshow.
Let Google Images round up whatever it can find (36,100,000 results in .19 seconds) under the search terms Afghanistan shootings. You’ll see the bodies. The babies. And the faces of their families. We caption them, “the bereaved.” These images should haunt you. Someday somebody related to some of these sufferers, these victims, these collaterally damaged souls, may try to kill you. And I have to tell you, I think you’ll have it coming.
Suppose a foreign army had been rummaging around the United States for a decade. They’d have built us some concrete-block elementary schools of course and drilled a few water wells. And their president or premier or prime minister would have secretly flown in under elaborate and expensive secrecy and security to shake hands with the soldiers and tell them what a good job they were doing bringing peace and stabilization to our misguided land, and who among us would not be grateful for that?
But then suppose, just occasionally, at intervals, one or several of those soldiers or pilots or special forces teams or secret espionage units burned a bunch of civilians for no good reason any of us could see? Mowed ‘em down. Ran ‘em over with a tank. Busted in the door in the nighttime and gutshot somebody’s old grandfather. Would that begin to take the glow off our gratitude?
OK, let’s be specific. Forget the afore-mentioned Samad Khan and the grieving Anar Gul. Don’t trouble yourself about the names of their children. (Do they even name their children like we do, these Muslims?) Pick any names that come to mind—good, honest, Americannames. Say Sam Knox is missing his wife and kids and Anne Greene sits there numb and devastated as she looks at the blanket her child is wrapped in. Does that feel any different? How much compensation would it take to make them get over it?
Come on, you cowardly bastard—look at those pictures! I know we don’t read so much these days, but you might have run across the term empathy during some mandatory literature course back in high school or college. So. How does it feel?
My kid has annoyed me a time or two today. Loud, wild, antagonistic here and there. (He’s seven.) I told him to stay off the rotten ice on the pond inlet stream while I was cutting bushes, but there he was, “I’m cold!”, up to his knees in slush and muck and icewater, and we quit early and repaired to the woodstove to dry him out. (He did agree he ought have listened to my wise counsel.) Then again, he told me a dozen times he loved me. And when he just couldn’t possibly get to sleep on his own, he had not the slightest trouble when I let him lie on the couch in my office as I wrote my little letter to you all out there.
And there he sleeps. And you could bomb my house and blow up my car and take away a leg and an arm and I might take your compensation check and relocate and regroup and nurse my grievances in the barroom. But if you or you or you or anybody came in here and killed him, I don’t care if you’re Christian or Jew or Mohammedan or a pagan suckled in some creed outworn, if you hurt him accidentally or on purpose, under orders or because you snapped under the pressure of your third deployment. I’d just want to kill you. And I don’t doubt I might kill you slowly and abuse your damned corpse in some ugly way. You and the guy behind you and the army that comes after that. I’d open you up and I’d nail you to the porch floor.
Oh, I’d be a bad person for doing so. Why, you might even say I’d become a terrorist, I suppose. And killing you wouldn’t bring back my wonderful boy, because whatever God you might pray to or believe in only ever made one of him, and you killed him, and there could be no joy, no purpose, no happiness in my life after that other than getting to you and grinding you up and making you pay. You’d compensate me with your flesh for forty-two pounds and forty-four inches of boy. And if I went crazy enough (and I might, and anybody might), I might need to kill a whole lot more who seemed to me to be pretty much like you. And there we would be.
I’m done. The snow is almost gone, and the pond will open up next week and the turtles come out of the mud, and Karter and I may just hatch some frog eggs in a tank in our kitchen. Because he won’t be a pile of bones and guts soaking into a blanket in the back of a truck, you see. I’ll gather him up now and dump him where I want him to sleep, and he’ll wake in the morning to defy me and argue with me and disobey my firm instructions to do this or that, and to love me as I’ll love him because that is how we evolved, and we do what we must do. As it is in Afghanistan and all over this world the United States of America thinks it owns.
Beware the rogue soldier, the corrupt government and the corporate press and the easy justification.
Come on. Just one more time. Look at their faces!
Egypt Parliament to Consider Rejecting US Aid
March 12, 2012 “RT” — In the wake of the NGO funding scandal the Egyptian parliament is to consider cutting more than $1 billion in US aid along with putting the military-appointed interim government to a vote of confidence.
The move by the lower chamber of the parliament comes after the March 1 departure of six American defendants in the case, leading to accusations that US pressure had led to interference in the judicial process.
The People’s Assembly urged that the person who allowed the Americans to leave Egypt be put on trial and declared its desire to refuse massive annual aid from the United States, Al-Ahram daily reports.
“We hope that members of the American Congress listen carefully to the decisions of the Egyptian parliament – the parliament of the revolution -and know quite well that the Egyptian people will never accept tinkering with the sovereignty of Egypt or American assistance to be used to humiliate it,” parliament speaker Saad El-Katatni said as quoted by the paper.
Socialist El-Badri Farghali, said “Egypt should stop obtaining assistance from America because this is not assistance from America to Egypt but from Egypt to America, and we want to uncover the names of all those who were involved in receiving money from this assistance.”
However, the move by the recently-elected parliament could have only symbolic significance as the ruling Supreme Council of the Armed Forces, which heavily relies on the US aid, will most likely veto it.
Also on Sunday the lower chamber called for putting the interim government of Kamal El-Ganzouri to a vote of confidence saying that it should be replaced with a coalition government that reflects the make-up of the Islamist-dominated parliament. This came after four cabinet ministers briefed the legislators on the case.
The minister of justice, Adel Abdel-Hamid, who attended the Sunday session told the lawmakers that the issue of lifting the travel ban on the Americans is now a matter of investigation by the Supreme Council of Justice.
The trial of NGO workers suspected of illegally using foreign funding and fomenting unrest has plunged US-Egyptian relations to their lowest point in 30 years.
US is preparing to “commit guerrilla attacks, assassination campaigns” to topple Assad
Paul Joseph Watson
Tuesday, March 6, 2012
A shocking email leaked as part of the Wikileaks Stratfor data dump reveals that the Pentagon is planning to direct terror attacks and assassinations inside Syria in a bid to topple President President Bashar al-Assad.
The email, written by Reva Bhalla, Stratfor’s Director of Analysis, contains details of a December 6 Pentagon meeting attended by members of the USAF strategic studies group along with four military officers at the Lieutenant Colonel level, “including one French and one British representative.”
Bhalla was told by the military officials that, despite official claims to the contrary, foreign troops from NATO powers were already on the ground in Syria.
“After a couple hours of talking, they said without saying that SOF teams (presumably from US, UK, France, Jordan, Turkey) are already on the ground focused on recce [reconnaissance] missions and training opposition forces,” states the email.
Bhalla goes on to describe how the mission of the undercover commandoes is hypothetically to “commit guerrilla attacks, assassination campaigns, try to break the back of the Alawite forces [Assad’s support base], elicit collapse from within.”
In other words, the Pentagon, along with other NATO powers, have already directed Special Forces troops stationed inside Syria to carry out terrorist attacks and assassinations in an effort to topple President President Bashar al-Assad.
The email states that such actions should be ready within a 2-3 month time period. Bhalla describes how a destabilization campaign was favorable to air strikes because unlike Libya, “Syrian air defenses are a lot more robust and are much denser.”
Some would argue that far from merely planning such attacks, the United States and other NATO powers are already using the Al-Qaeda- affiliated terrorists airlifted out of Libya into Syria to do the job for them. These terrorists have been blamed for bloody attacks that have killed both Syrian regime officials and innocent civilians, including a bombing last month in Syria’s second city of Aleppo which killed 28 people.
Footage has also emerged of western-looking troops carrying out indiscriminate attacks using rocket-propelled grenade launchers.
Carrying out terrorist attacks to destabilize governments is not a conspiracy theory, it is a widely acknowledged form of covert warfare. Only last month NBC News reported that Israel was paying terror groups to carry out bombings and assassinations in Iran in a bid to weaken the regime in Tehran.
Reports of foreign troops entering Syria have been circulating for months.
Last month Israeli intelligence outfit DebkaFile revealed that British Special Forces were inside Syria “operating with rebel forces under cover in the Syrian city of Homs just 162 kilometers from Damascus.”
According to the report, the foreign units are not engaging in direct combat but are acting in an advisory capacity, while also relaying requests for arms outside of the country.
According to Egyptian security officials, United States, Saudi Arabia and Jordan are also providing arms and training for Syrian rebels, dovetailing with former FBI translator Sibel Edmonds’ report that hundreds of NATO and US troops arrived on the Jordanian and Syrian border back in December for the purpose of training militants to overthrow President Bashar al-Assad.
NATO member Turkey is also reportedly arming terrorist groups to aid rebel fighters. Leaders of the Free Syria Army have also bragged about the claim that France and the United States have provided them with weapons and anti-aircraft missiles.
As we reported last week, during a BBC interview U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton admitted that the United States and Al-Qaeda were on the same side when it came to achieving regime change in Syria.
Just as in Libya, where the overthrow of Gaddafi was achieved through the use of Al-Qaeda groups, NATO and the United States are once again turning to terrorists as a means of achieving their geopolitical objectives in the region.
Indeed, as we reported back in November, some of the same Al-Qaeda terrorists who fought U.S. troops in Iraq were airlifted into Syria to aid rebels. Al Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahri’s has also publicly expressed support for Syrian rebel forces.
Paul Joseph Watson is the editor and writer for Prison Planet.com. He is the author of Order Out Of Chaos. Watson is also a regular fill-in host for The Alex Jones Show and Infowars Nightly News.
October 15, 2011 “Global Research ” Under the Obama Administration the United States has expanded the “long war” into Africa. Barack Hussein Obama, the so-called “Son of Africa” has actually become one of Africa’s worst enemies. Aside from his continued support of dictators in Africa, the Republic of Côte d’Ivoire (Ivory Coast) was unhinged under his watch. The division of Sudan was publicly endorsed by the White House before the referendum, Somalia has been further destabilized, Libya has been viciously attacked by NATO, and U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM) is going into full swing.
The war in Libya is just the start of a new cycle of external military adventurism inside Africa. The U.S. now wants more military bases inside Africa. France has also announced that it has the right to militarily intervene anywhere in Africa where there are French citizens and its interests are at risk. NATO is also fortifying its positions in the Red Sea and off the coast of Somalia.
As disarray and turmoil are once again uprooting Africa with external intervention, Israel sits silently in the background. Tel Aviv has actually been deeply involved in the new cycle of turmoil, which is tied to its Yinon Plan to reconfigure its strategic surrounding. This reconfiguration process is based on a well established technique of creating sectarian divisions which eventually will effectively neutralize target states or result in their dissolution.
Many of the problems afflicting the contemporary areas of Eastern Europe, Central Asia, Southwest Asia, South Asia, East Asia, Africa, and Latin America are actually the result of the deliberate triggering of regional tensions by external powers. Sectarian division, ethno-linguistic tension, religious differences, and internal violence have been traditionally exploited by the United States, Britain, and France in various parts of the globe. Iraq, Sudan, Rwanda, and Yugoslavia are merely a few recent examples of this strategy of “divide and conquer” being used to bring nations to their knees.
The Upheavals of Central-Eastern Europe and the Project for a “New Middle East”
The Middle East, in some regards, is a striking parallel to the Balkans and Central-Eastern Europe during the years leading up to the First World War. In the wake of the First World War, the borders of the multi-ethnic states in the Balkans and Central-Eastern Europe were redrawn and reconfigured by external powers, in alliance with local opposition forces. Since the First World War until the post-Cold War period the Balkans and Central-Eastern Europe have continued to experience a period of upheaval, violence and conflict that has continuously divided the region.
For years, there have been advocates calling for a “New Middle East” with redrawn boundaries in this region of the world where Europe, Southwest Asia, and North Africa meet. These advocates mostly sit in the capitals of Washington, London, Paris, and Tel Aviv. They envisage a region shaped around homogenous ethno-religious states. The formation of these states would signify the destruction of the larger existing countries of the region. The transition would be towards the formation of smaller Kuwait-like or Bahrain-like states, which could easily be managed and manipulated by the U.S., Britain, France, Israel, and their allies.
The Manipulation of the First “Arab Spring” during World War I
The plans for reconfiguring the Middle East started several years before the First World War. It was during the First World War, however, that the manifestation of these colonial designs could visibly be seen with the “Great Arab Revolt” against the Ottoman Empire.
Despite the fact that the British, French, and Italians were colonial powers which had prevented the Arabs from enjoying any freedom in countries like Algeria, Libya, Egypt, and Sudan, these colonial powers managed to portray themselves as the friends and allies of Arab liberation.
During the “Great Arab Revolt” the British and the French actually used the Arabs as foot soldiers against the Ottomans to further their own geo-political schemes. The secret Sykes–Picot Agreement between London and Paris is a case in point. France and Britain merely managed to use and manipulate the Arabs by selling them the idea of Arab liberation from the so-called “repression” of the Ottomans.
In reality, the Ottoman Empire was a multi-ethnic empire. It gave local and cultural autonomy to all its peoples, but was manipulated into the direction of becoming a Turkish entity. Even the Armenian Genocide that would ensue in Ottoman Anatolia has to be analyzed in the same context as the contemporary targeting of Christians in Iraq as part of a sectarian scheme unleashed by external actors to divide the Ottoman Empire, Anatolia, and the citizens of the Ottoman Empire.
After the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, it was London and Paris which denied freedom to the Arabs, while sowing the seeds of discord amongst the Arab peoples. Local corrupt Arab leaders were also partners in the project and many of them were all too happy to become clients of Britain and France. In the same sense, the “Arab Spring” is being manipulated today. The U.S., Britain, France, and others are now working with the help of corrupt Arab leaders and figures to restructure the Arab World and Africa.
The Yinon Plan
The Yinon Plan, which is a continuation of British stratagem in the Middle East, is an Israeli strategic plan to ensure Israeli superiority. It insists and stipulates that Israel must reconfigure its geo-political environment through the balkanization of the Middle Eastern and Arab states into smaller and weaker states.
Israeli strategists viewed Iraq as their biggest strategic challenge from an Arab state. This is why Iraq was outlined as the centerpiece to the balkanization of the Middle East and the Arab World. In Iraq, on the basis of the concepts of the Yinon Plan, Israeli strategists have called for the division of Iraq into a Kurdish state and two Arab states, one for Shiite Muslims and the other for Sunni Muslims. The first step towards establishing this was a war between Iraq and Iran, which the Yinon Plan discusses.
The Atlantic, in 2008, and the U.S. military’s Armed Forces Journal, in 2006, both published widely circulated maps that closely followed the outline of the Yinon Plan. Aside from a divided Iraq, which the Biden Plan also calls for, the Yinon Plan calls for a divided Lebanon, Egypt, and Syria. The partitioning of Iran, Turkey, Somalia, and Pakistan also all fall into line with these views. The Yinon Plan also calls for dissolution in North Africa and forecasts it as starting from Egypt and then spilling over into Sudan, Libya, and the rest of the region.
Note: The following map was drawn by Holly Lindem for an article by Jeffery Goldberg. It was published in The Atlantic in January/February 2008.
Map Copyright: The Atlantic, 2008.
Note: The following map was prepared by Lieutenant-Colonel Ralph Peters.
It was published in the Armed Forces Journal in June 2006, Peters is a retired colonel of the U.S. National War Academy.
Map Copyright Lieutenant-Colonel Ralph Peters 2006.
The Eradication of the Christian Communities of the Middle East
It is no coincidence that Egyptian Christians were attacked at the same time as the South Sudan Referendum and before the crisis in Libya. Nor is it a coincidence that Iraqi Christians, one of the world’s oldest Christian communities, have been forced into exile, leaving their ancestral homelands in Iraq. Coinciding with the exodus of Iraqi Christians, which occurred under the watchful eyes of U.S. and British military forces, the neighbourhoods in Baghdad became sectarian as Shiite Muslims and Sunni Muslims were forced by violence and death squads to form sectarian enclaves. This is all tied to the Yinon Plan and the reconfiguration of the region as part of a broader objective.
In Iran, the Israelis have been trying in vain to get the Iranian Jewish community to leave. Iran’s Jewish population is actually the second largest in the Middle East and arguably the oldest undisturbed Jewish community in the world. Iranian Jews view themselves as Iranians who are tied to Iran as their homeland, just like Muslim and Christian Iranians, and for them the concept that they need to relocate to Israel because they are Jewish is ridiculous.
In Lebanon, Israel has been working to exacerbate sectarian tensions between the various Christian and Muslim factions as well as the Druze. Lebanon is a springboard into Syria and the division of Lebanon into several states is also seen as a means to balkanizing Syria into several smaller sectarian Arab states. The objectives of the Yinon Plan are to divide Lebanon and Syria into several states on the basis of religious and sectarian identities for Sunni Muslims, Shiite Muslims, Christians, and the Druze. There could also be objectives for a Christian exodus in Syria too.
The new head of the Maronite Catholic Syriac Church of Antioch, the largest of the autonomous Eastern Catholic Churches, has expressed his fears about a purging of Arab Christians in the Levant and Middle East. Patriarch Mar Beshara Boutros Al-Rahi and many other Christian leaders in Lebanon and Syria are afraid of a Muslim Brotherhood takeover in Syria. Like Iraq, mysterious groups are now attacking the Christian communities in Syria. The leaders of the Christian Eastern Orthodox Church, including the Eastern Orthodox Patriarch of Jerusalem, have also all publicly expressed their grave concerns. Aside from the Christian Arabs, these fears are also shared by the Assyrian and Armenian communities, which are mostly Christian.
Sheikh Al-Rahi was recently in Paris where he met President Nicolas Sarkozy. It is reported that the Maronite Patriarch and Sarkozy had disagreements about Syria, which prompted Sarkozy to say that the Syrian regime will collapse. Patriarch Al-Rahi’s position was that Syria should be left alone and allowed to reform. The Maronite Patriarch also told Sarkozy that Israel needed to be dealt with as a threat if France legitimately wanted Hezbollah to disarm.
Because of his position in France, Al-Rahi was instantly thanked by the Christian and Muslim religious leaders of the Syrian Arab Republic who visited him in Lebanon. Hezbollah and its political allies in Lebanon, which includes most the Christian parliamentarians in the Lebanese Parliament, also lauded the Maronite Patriarch who later went on a tour to South Lebanon.
Sheikh Al-Rahi is now being politically attacked by the Hariri-led March 14 Alliance, because of his stance on Hezbollah and his refusal to support the toppling of the Syrian regime. A conference of Christian figures is actually being planned by Hariri to oppose Patriarch Al-Rahi and the stance of the Maronite Church. Since Al-Rahi announced his position, the Tahrir Party, which is active in both Lebanon and Syria, has also started targeting him with criticism. It has also been reported that high-ranking U.S. officials have also cancelled their meetings with the Maronite Patriarch as a sign of their displeasure about his positions on Hezbollah and Syria.
The Hariri-led March 14 Alliance in Lebanon, which has always been a popular minority (even when it was a parliamentary majority), has been working hand-in-hand with the U.S., Israel, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and the groups using violence and terrorism in Syria. The Muslim Brotherhood and other so-called Salafist groups from Syria have been coordinating and holding secret talks with Hariri and the Christian political parties in the March 14 Alliance. This is why Hariri and his allies have turned on Cardinal Al-Rahi. It was also Hariri and the March 14 Alliance that brought Fatah Al-Islam into Lebanon and have now helped some of its members escape to go and fight in Syria.
A Christian exodus is being planned for the Middle East by Washington, Tel Aviv, and Brussels. It is now being reported that Sheikh Al-Rahi was told in Paris by President Nicolas Sarkozy that the Christian communities of the Levant and Middle East can resettle in the European Union. This is no gracious offer. It is a slap in the face by the same powers that have deliberately created the conditions to eradicate the ancient Christian communities of the Middle East. The aim appears to be the resettling of the Christian communities outside of the region so as to delineate the Arab nations along the lines of being exclusively Muslim nations. This falls into accordance with the Yinon Plan.
Re-Dividing Africa: The Yinon Plan is very Much Alive and at Work…
In the same context as the sectarian divisions in the Middle East, the Israelis have outlined plans to reconfigure Africa. The Yinon Plan seeks to delineate Africa on the basis of three facets:
It seeks to draw dividing lines in Africa between a so-called “Black Africa” and a supposedly “non-Black” North Africa. This is part of a scheme to create a schism in Africa between what are assumed to be “Arabs” and so-called “Blacks.”
An attempt to separate the merging point of an Arab and African identity is underway.
This objective is why the ridiculous identity of an “African South Sudan” and an “Arab North Sudan” have been nurtured and promoted. This is also why black-skinned Libyans have been targeted in a campaign to “colour cleanse” Libya. The Arab identity in North Africa is being de-linked from its African identity. Simultaneously there is an attempt to eradicate the large populations of “black-skinned Arabs” so that there is a clear delineation between “Black Africa” and a new “non-Black” North Africa, which will be turned into a fighting ground between the remaining “non-Black” Berbers and Arabs.
In the same context, tensions are being fomented between Muslims and Christians in Africa, in such places as Sudan and Nigeria, to further create lines and fracture points. The fuelling of these divisions on the basis of skin-colour, religion, ethnicity, and language is intended to fuel disassociation and disunity in Africa. This is all part of a broader African strategy of cutting North Africa off from the rest of the African continent.
Israel and the African Continent
The Israelis have been quietly involved on the African continent for years. In Western Sahara, which is occupied by Morocco, the Israelis helped build a separation security wall like the one in the Israeli-occupied West Bank. In Sudan, Tel Aviv has armed separatist movements and insurgents. In South Africa, the Israelis supported the Apartheid regime and its occupation of Namibia. In 2009, the Israeli Foreign Ministry outlined that Africa would be the renewed focus of Tel Aviv.
Israel’s two main objectives in Africa are to impose the Yinon Plan, in league with its own interests, and to assist Washington in becoming the hegemon of Africa. In this regard, the Israelis also pushed for the creation of AFRICOM. The Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies (IASPS), an Israeli think-tank, is one example.
Washington has outsourced intelligence work in Africa to Tel Aviv. Tel Aviv is effectively involved as one of the parties in a broader war not just “inside” Africa, but “over” Africa. In this war, Tel Aviv is working alongside Washington and the E.U. against China and its allies, which includes Iran.
Tehran is working alongside Beijing in a similar manner as Tel Aviv is with Washington. Iran is helping the Chinese in Africa through Iranian connections and ties. These ties also include Tehran’s ties to private Lebanese and Syrian business interests in Africa. Thus, within the broader rivalry between Washington and Beijing, an Israeli-Iranian rivalry has also unfolded within Africa.  Sudan is Africa’s third largest weapons producer, as a result of Iranian support in weapons manufacturing. Meanwhile, while Iran provides military assistance to Khartoum, which includes several military cooperation agreements, Israel is involved in various actions directed against the Sudanese. 
Israel and Libya
Libya had been considered as “a spoiler” which undermined the interests of the former colonial powers in Africa. In this regard, Libya had taken on some hefty pan-African development plans intended to industrialize Africa and transform Africa into an integrated and assertive political entity. These initiatives conflicted with the interests of the external powers competing with one another in Africa, but it was especially unacceptable to Washington and the major E.U. countries. In this regard, Libya had to be crippled and neutralized as an entity supportive of African progress and pan-African unity.
The role of Israel and the Israeli lobby was fundamental in opening the door to NATO’s military intervention in Libya. According to Israeli sources, it was U.N. Watch that actually orchestrated the events in Geneva to remove Libya from the U.N. Human Rights Council and to ask the U.N. Security Council to intervene.  U.N. Watch is formally affiliated with the American Jewish Committee (AJC), which has influence in the formulation of U.S. foreign policy and is part of the Israeli lobby in the United States. The International Federation of Human Rights (FIDH), which helped launch the unverified claims about 6,000 people being slaughtered by Qaddafi, is also tied to the Israeli lobby in France.
Tel Aviv had been in contact simultaneously with both the Transitional Council and the Libyan government in Tripoli. Mossad agents were also in Tripoli, one of which was a former station manager. At about the same time, French members of the Israeli lobby were visiting Benghazi. In a case of irony, the Transitional Council would claim that Colonel Qaddafi was working with Israel, while it made pledges to recognize Israel to president Sarkozy’s special envoy Bernard-Henri Lévy who would then convey the message to Israeli leaders . A similar pattern (to that of Israel’s links to the Transitional Council) had also developed at an earlier stage in South Sudan, which was armed by Israel.
Despite the Transitional Council’s position on Israel, its followers still tried to demonize Qaddafi by claiming he was secretly Jewish. Not only was this untrue, but it was also bigoted. These accusations were intended to be a form of character assassination that equated being a Jew as something negative.
In reality, Israel and NATO are in the same camp. Israel is a de facto member of NATO. Had Qaddafi been conniving with Israel while the Transitional Council was working with NATO, this would mean that both sides were actually being played as fools against one another.
Preparing the Chessboard for the “Clash of Civilizations”
It is at this point that all the pieces have to be put together and the dots have to be connected.
The chessboard is being staged for a “Clash of Civilizations” and all the chess pieces are being put into place.
The Arab World is in the process of being cordoned off and sharp delineation lines are being created. These lines of delineation are replacing the seamless lines of transition between different ethno-linguistic, skin-colour, and religious groups.
Under this scheme, there can no longer be a melding transition between societies and countries. This is why the Christians in the Middle East and North Africa, such as the Copts, are being targeted. This is also why black-skinned Arabs and black-skinned Berbers, as well as other North African population groups which are black-skinned, are facing genocide in North Africa.
What is being staged is the creation of an exclusively “Muslim Middle East” area (excluding Israel) that will be in turmoil over Shiite-Sunni fighting. A similar scenario is being staged for a “non-Black North Africa” area which will be characterized by a confrontation between Arabs and Berber. At the same time, under the “Clash of Civilizations” model, the Middle East and North Africa are slated to simultaneously be in conflict with the so-called “West” and “Black Africa.”
This is why both Nicolas Sarzoky, in France, and David Cameron, in Britain, made back-to-back declarations during the start of the conflict in Libya that multiculturalism is dead in their respective Western European societies. 
Real multiculturalism threatens the legitimacy of the NATO war agenda. It also constitutes an obstacle to the implementation of the “Clash of Civilizations” which constitutes the cornerstone of U.S. foreign policy. In this regard, Zbigniew Brzezinski, former U.S. National Security Advisor, explains why multiculturalism is a threat to Washington and its allies: “[A]s America becomes an increasingly multicultural society, it may find it more difficult to fashion a consensus on foreign policy issues [e.g., war with the Arab World, China, Iran, or Russia and the former Soviet Union], except in the circumstances of a truly massive and widely perceived direct external threat. Such a consensus generally existed throughout World War II and even during the Cold War [and exists now because of the ‘Global War on Terror’].” 
Brzezinski’s next sentence is the qualifier of why populations would oppose or support wars: “[The consensus] was rooted, however, not only in deeply shared democratic values, which the public sensed were being threatened, but also in a cultural and ethnic affinity for the predominantly European victims of hostile totalitarianisms.” 
Risking being redundant, it has to be mentioned again that it is precisely with the intention of breaking these cultural affinities between the Middle East-North Africa (MENA) region and the so-called “Western World” and sub-Saharan Africa that Christians and black-skinned peoples are being targeted.
Ethnocentrism and Ideology: Justifying Today’s “Just Wars”
In the past, the colonial powers of Western Europe would indoctrinate their people. Their objective was to acquire popular support for colonial conquest. This took the form of spreading Christianity and promoting Christian values with the support of armed merchants and colonial armies.
At the same time, racist ideologies were put forth. The people whose lands were colonized were portrayed as “sub-human,” inferior, or soulless. Finally, the “White Man’s burden” of taking on a mission of civilizing the so-called “uncivilized peoples of the world” was used. This cohesive ideological framework was used to portray colonialism as a “just cause.” The latter in turn was used to provide legitimacy to the waging of “just wars” as a means to conquering and “civilizing” foreign lands.
Today, the imperialist designs of the United States, Britain, France, and Germany have not changed. What has changed is the pretext and justification for waging their neo-colonial wars of conquest. During the colonial period, the narratives and justifications for waging war were accepted by public opinion in the colonizing countries, such as Britain and France. Today’s “just wars” and “just causes” are now being conducted under the banners of women’s rights, human rights, humanitarianism, and democracy.
 The Economist, “Israel and Iran in Africa: A search for allies in a hostile world,” February 4, 2011.
 Tova Lazaroff, “70 rights groups call on UN to condemn Tripoli,” Jerusalem Post, February 22, 2011.
 Radio France Internationale, “Libyan rebels will recognise Israel, Bernard-Henri Lévy tells Netanyahu,” June 2, 2011.
 Robert Marquand,”Why Europe is turning away from multiculturalism,” Christian Science Monitor, March 4, 2011.
 Zbigniew Brzezinski, The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives (New York: Basic Books October 1997), p.211
ANNEX I: MAP OF DIFFERENT WORLD CIVILIZATIONS REFLECTING SAMUEL HUNTINGTON’S MODEL
* These civilizational divisions and categories are incorrect. There are no clearcutting divisions between many of these so-called and supposedly “distinct civilizations.”
ANNEX II: MODEL OF SAMUEL HUNTINGTON’S “CLASH OF CIVILIZATIONS”
Copyright © Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya, Global Research, 2011
The quality of life continues to cascade in certain areas of Western Libya while public anxiety noticeably rises over missing Libyan children as the first week of an unusually stressful Ramadan passes.
The shortage of gasoline has become acute and despite government efforts to curtail price gauging, one taxi driver told this observer yesterday that while the usual price of ‘benzene’ was 3.75 liters (one gallon) for $.40 (forty US cents) he is now having to pay as much as ” 4 dinars for one liter of petrol!” That is roughly the equivalent of 13 US dollars for a gallon of gasoline, a huge price surge in a country long accustomed to cheap, heavily subsidized fuel. “Informal economy” (black market) fuel arrives in car trunks from the Tunisian border and its increasingly common to see fellows with a make shift funnel trying to get more benzene into their vehicle tanks than they splash and spill on neighborhood streets.
Walking around the “medina” off Omar Muktar Street near my hotel yesterday afternoon, the angst over deteriorating conditions is apparent. Shops, like homes, are now subject to rolling blackouts and quickly become hot and stuffy, discouraging would be customers from entering. Some food stores have to discard milk and other perishable items given the up to 11 hour power cuts that send temperatures above 110F. One gentleman on Rashid Street in downtown Tripoli said his family had not had power for five days and the pump that supplies water to his apartment building stopped working so they lack two essential utilities.
NATO’s arguable act of piracy earlier this week in commandeering the fuel tanker ship Cartagena off the coast of Malta that was bringing gasoline to Tripoli and sending it instead to Rebel militia based close to Benghazi is yet again explained from NATO HQ as necessary for “protecting the civilian population of Libya.”
According to Libya’s Deputy Foreign Minister Khaled Kaim, “The age of piracy is coming back to the Mediterranean because of NATO.”
Some frustrated shop keepers just shutter their shops and seek relief at the beach or take a nap waiting for sundown and their Ramadan Iftar (feast) to begin. But lack of electricity even affects its preparation. (ed. note: 15 minutes ago NATO reportedly bombed the public beach near my hotel as three other bombs landed nearby—targets unknown)
Every time a bomb blast is heard, a chorus of passersby and kids invariably point toward the bomb site and watch the rising white or black smoke (the color depending on the type of bomb or missile) and some shout, “F— NATO! F—Obama!” Etc.
If a foreigner is confronted by angry citizens who may blame Americans for NATO’s bombing, a sure fire way to quickly reduce crowd tension is for the foreigner to make the peace sign and make a fist with his other hand and chant a few times: “Allah! Mohammad! Muammar! Libye! Abass!” (God!, Mohammad!, Qadaffi!, Libya!, that’s all we need!”) The locals appreciate the sentiment and pre-teens often join the popular chant and dance.
As of the morning of 8/7/11 NATO statistics show that since 3/31/11, NATO forces have launched 18,270 sorties, mainly against Western Libya, including 6,932 bomb/missile strike sorties. Last night (8/6/11) there were 115 sorties including 45 bombings of which 12 were in central Tripoli starting a 10 p.m.
To their great credit, some Congressional staffers on the US Senate Armed Services Committee who liaise with the Pentagon, have acted on constituent complaints and have criticized NATO’s incomplete description of its bombing of Libyan civilians.
For example earlier this week NATO reported its bombing of the village on Zlitan, about 160 miles east of Tripoli in the Western Mountains as follows: “In the vicinity of Zlitan:1 Ammunition Storage Facility, 1 Military Facility, 2 Multiple Rocket Launchers.”
However, still absent from this particular NATO report on its website is the fact that its bombing attack killed the wife and two children of Mustafa Naji, a local Zlitan physics teacher. Mustafa’s wife Ibtisam, and their two children, Mohammad 5 and Muttasim, were pulverized. Once again, NATO said it could not confirm any claims of “accidental killings” but would recommend an investigation.
As was apparent one week after UNSCR 1973 was adopted, NATO is the instrument of the Obama administration’s policy of regime change in Libya. NATO has virtually assumed the “rebels” command and control function in Libya’s civil war. This afternoon, Libyan Prime Minister Baghdadi Mahmoudi claimed that most of the rebel leadership has left Libya and he challenged them to hold a meeting during Ramadan. Mahmoudi claims that NATO is using Islamic extremists because they are more reliable in carrying out NATO orders as it seeks to break the civilian population’s will to resist, similar to Israel’s bombing campaign targeting the civilian population of Lebanon during the July 2006 war.
WHERE ARE THE CHILDREN?
Also of growing public and government concern in Western Libya is the whereabouts of 53 female and 52 male children aged one to 12 years and another group ranging from 12 to 18 years, both part of a government run home for orphans and abused children that until February was operating in Misrata, now under rebel control. According to several reports over the past three months and testimony presented last Thursday evening to the international media gathered at the Tripoli Rexis Hotel, by the General Union for Civil Society Organizations.
The 105 children, part of more than 1000 missing, were “kidnapped” by rebel forces as they entered Misrata and went on a killing spree, some of which has been documented by Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International among other groups. There is no question that the children are no longer in their sheltered facility. But from there what became of them remains a mystery.
The Libyan government claims the youngsters were kidnapped by rebels who went on a rampage in late February. Several reports from eyewitnesses claim that the children were last seen being put onto either a Turkish, Italian, or French boat. More than one witness claimed to have observed some of the children being sold in Tunisia. On his tweeter page, the local Russian Telesur reporter said that “several sources have affirmed that the 105 children were taken out of the country in a ship that could be Turkish, French or Italian.”
Libyan Social Affairs Minister Ibrahim Sharif told reporters in Tripoli this week that, “We want the truth and we hold those countries responsible for the well-being of these children who are neither soldiers nor combatants.” Sharif added that a rebel doctor captured by government troops testified that some of the orphans had been taken to France and Italy.
Misrata’s history as a main 18th-19th century North African slave trading port, is a fact that today partially explains tensions among the one third of Libya’s population that is black. Most are descendants of slaves and many live in Western Libya in villages now fighting the Misrata and Benghazi based rebels. Their concern for the disappeared children is especially acute.
While Libya has had perhaps the most strictly enforced child protection laws in the Middle East and Africa, people here remember clearly that France was at the center of a scandal in 2007 when aid workers from the Zoe’s Ark charity attempted to fly 103 children out of Chad, which borders Libya to the south, who they said were orphans from neighboring Sudan. International aid staff later found that the children were in fact Chadian and had at least one living parent. People here fear a similar fate for the Libyan youngsters.
Also on people’s minds in Libya is what happened two years ago in Haiti when “orphans,” according to local authorities, were kidnapped. Given the epidemic of human trafficking in this region, especially of children, fears are well founded.
The Libyan government as well as both the Roman Catholic Papal representative Bishop Giovanni Martinelli, and Father Daoud of the Anglican Church of Christ the King, in Tripoli have demanded that the UN investigate and find the children.
As for the National Transition Council, its spokesman denied charges that they have sold the children and claim that the Libyan government in Tripoli have all the children and that they are using them as human shields at the now five times bombed Bab al Azizya complex in central Tripoli. No known human rights organization or journalist who has investigated this claim has reported seeing any sign of the children at Bab al Azizya. The General Union noted above, has photos and names and ages of all the missing children and have widely publicized them.
More than a dozen social welfare organizations, women’s groups and Libya’s Lawyer syndicates have launched an intensive media and public involvement campaign to find the children who have now been missing for nearly six months.
Franklin Lamb is in Libya and can be reached c/o firstname.lastname@example.org
What happened in London last night – the torching of private property, wanton destruction, looting and generalized violence, was lamentable and unacceptable. Yet does it not provide a perfect answer from God, underlining the sheer hypocrisy with which western governments view and conduct policy, especially when we draw lines of comparison with Libya?
So, let us draw parallels and see how the UK authorities come out of this. On Thursday, the British police shot dead a man in the street. Tensions escalated during Friday and on Saturday night, some 300 youths congregated outside the local police station in the London area of Tottenham in a peaceful demonstration which got out of hand as members of the public from other areas of London and beyond ran amok in the streets, torching buildings and vehicles as they went on a looting spree.
Now let us imagine that for months – nay, years…I repeat, years, foreign powers had been arming and aiding not 300, but rather, 30,000 (thirty thousand) Islamist fanatics, who, equipped with heavy machine-guns, tanks, self-propelled artillery and anti-aircraft munitions, ran amok in London, Manchester, Liverpool and Bristol. If the police shot dead one man in Tottenham, if the police shot dead the Brazilian Jean Charles de Menezes, because he, er… “looked Asian” back in 2007, what would they do with 30,000 marauding thugs? Why, according to the British Government, evidently nothing, they would just stand back because “the people were deciding”.
So why the brouhaha about Tottenham? But wait a minute, the police did react, against unarmed civilians! And if one civilian death is the result of a two-day incident involving 300 people, then we can extrapolate the figure of 100 civilian deaths at least, in the early hours of a general uprising, more or less exactly the real figures now coming out of Benghazi, and among these were Gaddafi supporters. Interesting.
Now let us imagine these “unarmed civilians” being attacked by the British police were actually heavily armed, had links to Al-Qaeda, were led by a convicted terrorist, were going around slashing people’s throats in the streets, were torching government property and ransacking public offices. Let us imagine someone placed a stash of Viagra tablets on the floor of a police station and another stash of condoms inside the cells of Scotland Yard HQ, and then some American Congresswoman could claim there was proof of mass rape by the British authorities.
Then let someone call in the UN to bomb the crap out of Britain for five months because unarmed civilians were being attacked, to bomb the British armed forces fighting against this scourge so that the Islamist fanatics could gain ground, let us imagine the international media carried out an orchestrated campaign involving a blackout of the truth and the dissemination of lies, blaming the British authorities for atrocities it did not commit, blaming the RAF for sorties it did not fly…
Let us imagine the leaders of this UN clique of cowards, bombing British civilians from 30,000 feet for 5 (five) long months claimed that this was not about removing Cameron and Hague, then claimed that it would be better if they went, then claimed “They have to go”. Then the British people could decide whether they were allowed to remain in Britain but of course, exile in Burkina Faso would be more appropriate (perhaps not, I insult the good Burkinese people)…
Let us imagine that the British Armed Forces put up a struggle and Cameron and Hague and The Queen appeared on State TV (whose antennae were bombed systematically), let us imagine that the equivalent of 20 million Britons took to the streets supporting their dearly beloved leaders (and only a handful of Islamist extremists were actually against them) and let us imagine their defiance was heralded by the British people who vowed to fight on the beaches and shores and cities and hills and villages and promised solemnly never to surrender…
Let us imagine that in face of this defiance, the UN coalition of cowards started lashing out in frustration, calling for the destruction of civilian structures to break the will of the British people, and bombed the main water supplies, bombed hospitals, bombed centres for handicapped children, bombed children’s schools and in a wanton criminal act of first-degree murder, targeted the house of David Cameron, murdering his family in cold blood because they thought he was there. How would David Cameron feel?
In fact, given the behaviour of God-fearing Christians in Libya, I tend to side with Allah and the good Moslems trying to celebrate Ramadan as cowardly Christian crusaders try to kill them, destroy their civilian structures and impose foreign values on their society with a top-down approach. I only hope and pray that the clique of nations involved in this outrage reap what they have sown, tenfold.
By this, I mean that I hope that what they have wished and meted out to others comes back to them multiplied by ten. After all, they claim they are acting in goodwill. So…Allaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahu Akhbar!