Islamic law for Libya: Will we end up missing Gadhafi?

THE PLOT AGAINST LIBYA…

Mustafa Abdul-Jalil and Mahmoud Jibril Have Been Paving the Way for NATO’s Conquest Since 2007

by Dan Glazebrook / September 12th, 2011

A violent rebellion broke out in Benghazi, Libya on February 15th this year. Six days later, Libyan Justice Minister Mustafa Abdul-Jalil resigned to set up an alternative government. On February 27th, the Transitional National Council was established, and on March 5th, this body had declared itself the “sole representative of all Libya”, with Abdul-Jalil at its head. France recognised the TNC as the legitimate Libyan government on March 10th and Britain offered them a diplomatic office on UK soil the same day. Nine days later, the Council set up a new Libyan Central Bank and National Oil Company. In barely a month from the start of the rebellion, Abdul-Jalil had positioned himself as head not only of the rebels, but of the new government in waiting, with control of Libyan resources and monetary policy and the blessing of the West. On March 17th, NATO began its mass slaughter of Libyan soldiers in order to install his regime.

Clearly, seasoned imperial powers such as Britain, France and the US, would not commit to the huge expenditure of a months-long air campaign to bring somebody to power in such a strategically important, oil rich state, unless they were already a tried and trusted asset. So who exactly is Abdul Jalil?

Abdul-Jalil gained his job in the Libyan government in January 2007, when he was named Secretary of the General People’s Committee for Justice (the equivalent of Justice Minister). He has been paving the way for NATO’s military and economic conquest of Libya ever since.

First, as head of the judiciary, he oversaw the release from prison of the hundreds of anti-Gaddafi fighters who went on to form the core of the insurgency. Saif al-Islam Gaddafi (Muamar’s son) was leading the prisoner release programme – a move he now publicly regrets as being naïve in the extreme – but faced stiff opposition from powerful elements within his own government. Having a sympathetic Justice Minister was therefore crucial to allowing the releases to go ahead smoothly. Hundreds of members of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group – including its founder Abdulhakim Belhadj, now military chief of Tripoli – were released in 2009 and 2010, and went on to form the only trained and experienced indigenous fighting units of the rebellion. In January 2010, Abdul-Jalil threatened to resign unless the prisoner release programme was sped up. On the second day of the insurgency, the final batch of 110 members of the LIFG were released; his work done, Abdul-Jalil quit his role of Justice Minister soon after to set up the TNC.

Second, Abdul-Jalil was able to use his position to help prepare the legal framework for the corporate takeover of Libyan resources that was enacted so swiftly after the creation of the TNC. Although his official role was head of the judiciary, a large part of the dialogue between Abdul-Jalil and US officials recorded in leaked US diplomatic cables focused on privatisation of the economy. These reported Abdul-Jalil’s enthusiasm for “private sector involvement”, and revealed his belief that this would require regime change, or as the cables euphemistically put it, “international assistance”, to fully achieve. The cables also reported Abdul-Jalil’s ominous comment that, on the matter of creating a “sound commercial legal environment” and improving relations between Libya and the US, “less talk and more action was needed” .

Thirdly, Abdul-Jalil was able to arrange ‘below-the-radar’ covert meetings between the pro-privatisation Libyans in the ‘Commercial Law Development Programme’ and US officials, both in the US and in Libya. The leaked US cables praised his “willingness to allow his staff to communicate with emboffs [Embassy officials] outside of official channels” and noted that “his organization seems to have a parallel track in securing visa approvals, bypassing Protocol and the MFA [Ministry for Foreign Affairs].”

Shortly after Abdul-Jalil’s appointment in 2007, the other key player in today’s TNC – President Mahmoud Jibril – was also given a government job in Libya. Jibril was made Head of the National Planning Council and later Head of the National Economic Development Board where, according to the US cables, he too helped to “pave the way” for the privatisation of Libya’s economy and “welcomed American companies”. US officials were positively ecstatic about Jibril after their meeting in May 2009, concluding that “With a PhD in strategic planning from the University of Pittsburgh, Jibril is a serious interlocutor who “gets” the U.S. perspective.” Very revealing given the spate of ambassador defections that followed the Benghazi rebellion was the additional revelation that Jibril had been helping to facilitate six US training programmes for diplomats.

2007 also turned out to be a crucial year for the other big player in today’s TNC, Head of Tripoli’s Military Council, Abdulhakim Belhadj. Belhadj was the founder of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, an Al-Qaeda affiliate which launched an armed insurrection against the Libyan state in 1995 lasting for two years. His release from prison in Libya in March 2010, along with hundreds of other LIFG fighters, was the culmination of a process that began with an open letter published in November 2007 by Norman Benotman – one of the group’s many fighters who had been given a safe haven in the UK since the failed uprising. His letter renounced violence and, according to the London Times, “asked Al-Qaeda to give up all its operations in the Islamic world and in the West, adding that ordinary westerners were blameless and should not be attacked”. The letter led to a process of dialogue between the LIFG and the Libyan government, and was followed up two years later by an apology by the LIFG for their anti-government violence in the past, and a statement that “the reduction of jihad to fighting with the sword is an error and shortcoming”. Someone had obviously hinted to them that drones and B52 bombers would be far more effective.

So 2007 was the year that launched these three men on the path towards their current role as NATO’s proxy rulers in Libya. Benotman’s letter made NATO support for a violent Al-Qaeda affiliate politically possible, and helped to sucker Saif al-Islam into releasing the very people who would become the ground forces in the overthrow of his government. Abdul-Jalil’s appointment as Justice Minister smoothed over the fighters’ release, and prepared the legal framework for an economic takeover by Western corporations. Jibril’s appointment as Planning Minister prepared, at a micro-level, the detail of how this takeover would come about, and cultivated the relationships with the Western companies that would be invited in.

So why did all this come about? Who was pulling the strings?

In the case of Benotman’s letter, this would have been a fairly simple matter of MI6 contacting him in London, where he lived, and putting him in touch with a decent PR firm to help draft the letter that would make it politically possible for NATO to set itself up as the LIFG’s airforce.

As for the two government appointments, Saif al-Islam Gaddafi was ultimately responsible, but he was clearly not intending the outcome that resulted. He was implementing political and economic reforms driven by both genuine belief, and a naïve desire to improve relations between his government and the West; he did not realise that he was unwittingly laying the ground for the political and economic destruction of his country. So the question is – was he acting on somebody else’s advice?

If he was, the most likely candidate is Mark Allen.

Mark Allen was the MI6 agent who had facilitated Libya’s ‘rapprochement’ with the West in 2003. Saif al-Islam had led the negotiations on the Libyan side, so by 2007, the two men knew each other quite well. But by then, Allen was no longer officially employed by MI6. In 2004, he had been fast tracked by the British Cabinet Office, bypassing the usual security procedures, to work for BP and in 2007, he successfully concluded a massive £15billion oil deal between BP and the Libyan government. Could the appointment of Abdul-Jalil and Mahmoud Jibril have been part of this deal? In hindsight, given their subsequent roles, it seems highly likely that MI6 would have used whatever leverage it could to manoeuvre willing accomplices into positions inside the Libyan government.

According to the Daily Mail, Allen was also actively involved in pressuring the UK government to support the prisoner release programme. Of course, the tone of their article, as with the current media furore about MI6 complicitity in Belhadj’s torture, all fit in with the overall narrative that Gaddafi and the West had a great relationship until the rebellion started and forced NATO to conduct a humanitarian intervention. It is all designed to obscure the reality that Libya under Gaddafi’s leadership was an obstacle to Western domination and subordination of Africa, and that MI6 has been plotting his removal ever since he came to power.

Dan Glazebrook writes for the Morning Star newspaper and is a member of the editorial board of OURAIM publications. Read other articles by Dan.

This article was posted on Monday, September 12th, 2011 at 8:00am and is filed under Capitalism, Espionage/”Intelligence”, Libya, NATO, United Kingdom, Wikileaks.

http://dissidentvoice.org/2011/09/mustafa-abdul-jalil-and-mahmoud-jibril-have-been-paving-the-way-for-nato%E2%80%99s-conquest-since-2007-2/

COULDN’T RISK A TRIAL NOW COULD THEY- EXECUTION THE ONLY OPTION.

Islamic law for Libya: Will we end up missing Gadhafi?

NATO AND WESTERN POLITICAL ELITES ARE GOOD AT SPREADING ISLAM- YUGOSLAVIA BROKEN UP- ISLAM DOMINATES- IRAQ- AFGHANISTAN WOMEN ARE NO BETTER OFF- RAPE OF A WOMAN SANCTIONED IN THEIR LAW.AFRICAN COUNTRIES THE WEST HAS BEEN BUSY SUPPORTING RULERS OF THE ISLAMIC VARIETY AS OPPOSED TO THE CHRISTIAN VARIETY.

Islamic law for Libya: Will we end up missing Gadhafi?

Libya’s interim leader declares that the new Libya will be based on Sharia law — and critics of the war are quick to say, “I told you so”
posted on October 24, 2011, at 4:12 PM

Mustafa Abdel-Jalil, head of Libya’s transitional government, with leaders of the National Army at a news conference after Moammar Gadhafi’s death: Libya’s new regime will run the country according to Sharia law. Photo: REUTERS/Esam Al-Fetori SEE ALL 99 PHOTOS
Best Opinion: Power Line, Jonathan Turley, ABC News

The head of Libya’s transitional government, Mustafa Abdul-Jalil, announced on Sunday that post-Gadhafi Libya will be structured according to Sharia law. “We are an Islamic state,” he told a crowd in Benghazi. He then lifted a ban on polygamy, and declared that the charging of interest on loans would be forbidden, in accordance with Sharia. Jalil had said before that Islamic traditions would be respected in the new Libya, but his latest pronouncement was more radical than expected. Will the U.S. and Europe actually come to regret helping Libya’s rebels destroy the regime of Moammar Gadhafi?

The new regime might be worse than Gadhafi: This confirms the main concern conservatives had about joining the air war against Gadhafi, says John Hinderaker at Power Line. The cold truth is we still don’t know “whether the regime that follows Gadhafi’s will be an improvement.” It’s “deeply ironic” that liberals who reveled in America’s post-Saddam difficulties in Iraq can’t see that we face the same uncertainty in Libya.
“Observations on the death of Gadhafi”

Clearly, we have not advanced the cause of freedom: Here we go again, says Jonathan Turley at his blog. As happened in Afghanistan and Iraq, we’ve helped install a government in Libya that “rejects notions of separation of church (or mosque) and state.” Libya’s new government “will by definition disenfranchise religious minorities” and women. “I am not sure we can afford any more successes in our foreign policies.”
“New Libyan leader pledges to impose Sharia law on the country”

Don’t be so pessimistic: “What outsiders may not appreciate is that Libya is a very conservative Muslim country,” says Jeffrey Kofman at ABC News. Alcohol is forbidden, and virtually all women wear the hijab. But after playing a key role in the revolution, women are going to demand basic freedoms. All the rebels want democracy — the challenge will be crafting a constitution that respects religious traditions and basic rights, such as free speech, at the same time.
“The sweet taste of freedom: Libya moves forward”

WE SHALL SEE!!

http://theweek.com/article/index/220677/islamic-law-for-libya-will-we-end-up-missing-gadhafi

GADAFFI AND HIS SON HAVE NOW BEEN BURIED TOGETHER IN SOME SECRET GRAVE…..

Fact Sheet
How Gadhafi was killed: What we know
An account of what happened in the minutes leading up to — and just after — the disgraced Libyan dictator’s death on Thursday
posted on October 20, 2011, at 3:31 PM

A video screen shot shows Moammar Gadhafi, covered in blood, being pulled from a truck and hauled off by NTC fighters in Sirte. Photo: REUTERS/Libyan TV SEE ALL 99 PHOTOS
As the world processes the news that Col. Moammar Gadhafi, Libya’s dictator for 42 years, was killed Thursday in the battle for Gadhafi’s hometown of Sirte, the prevailing question is: How did he die? Of course, many details are still unconfirmed and somewhat hazy. But there’s plenty we do know. A concise guide:

Where did this happen?
Gadhafi “had been barricaded in with his heavily armed loyalists” in one of the few buildings they still held in Sirte, CBS News reports. These soldiers were “furiously battling” the revolutionary fighters when NATO airstrikes, carried out by French warplanes, began blasting the area.

Did Gadhafi try to escape?
Yes. Following the airstrikes, an 80-vehicle convoy of pro-Gadhafi forces attempted to get out. Gadhafi was part of that convoy, the AP reports. When airstrikes halted the convoy’s progress, “revolutionary fighters moved in on the vehicle carrying Gadhafi himself.” After gunfire was exchanged, Gadhafi, his neck wounded, was pulled from the vehicle, manhandled by angry crowds, and eventually taken to an ambulance. But not everyone agrees that soldiers pulled the despot from his vehicle: Reports from BBC News and Britain’s Telegraph say that Gadhafi and his bodyguards were hiding in a large concrete pipe by a nearby roadway when he was cornered and captured.

What happened when rebels got their hands on Gadhafi?
Several graphic videos show Gadhafi just after he was captured. In one video that originally aired on Al-Jazeera, “the goateed, balding Gadhafi is seen in a blood-soaked shirt, and his face is bloodied,” says the AP. As he is shoved through a crowd and pushed onto the hood of a pickup truck, fighters around him chant, “God is great.” Pinned against the truck, Gadhafi is “struck on the head with a pistol while a group of fighters manhandled him,” says MSNBC. The footage then shows him being dragged again, while soldiers hit him and pull his hair. Gadhafi finally collapses on the ground, and his limp body is rolled over the pavement by the crowd. A doctor who was part of the medical team that examined Gadhafi tells the AP that he bled to death half an hour later.

Was he shot?
According to many officials, news sources, and witnesses, Gadhafi was indeed shot. A rebel fighter tells James Foley at the Global Post that he saw Gadhafi get shot in the head and close to the heart. Another fighter tells BBC News that Gadhafi shouted, “Don’t shoot!” when he was surrounded by rebel soldiers. A recently surfaced cell phone photo purports to show Gadhafi’s dead body with a bullet wound to the temple. The doctor who examined Gadhafi said the deposed leader had two bullet wounds, to the head and chest. According to The Telegraph, Gadhafi also suffered two gunshots to the legs.

What will happen to his body?
The body was paraded through the streets of the nearby city of Misrata, says CBS News, mounted on top of a vehicle and surrounded by a large crowd. Libyans chanted, “The blood of the martyrs will not go in vain,” according to footage that aired on Al-Arabiya. According to Abdul Hakim Belhaj, the leader of the Tripoli military council, the body is now being transported to an undisclosed location.

Sources: AP, BBC News (2), CBS News, Global Post, MSNBC, NY Times, Telegraph, Times of India

http://theweek.com/article/index/220560/how-gadhafi-was-killed-what-we-know

LIBYANS- IN TRIPOLI WON’T BE TOO HAPPY WHEN THEIR SUBSIDISED HOUSING ETC DOESN’T RETURN- THEIR HIGHEST STANDARD OF LIVING IN NORTH AFRICA CEASES TO BE……WELCOME TO DEBT SLAVERY LIBYA!

THE PARASITE HAS ENTERED YOUR HOMELAND AND WILL BLEED YOU DRY!!!

4 responses to “Islamic law for Libya: Will we end up missing Gadhafi?

  1. FRENCH JETS ATTACKED THE CONVOY – GADAFFI NOT IN SOME DIRTY HOLE THE WESTERN MEDIA HAD TO SAY…………..HUMANITARIAN…..THE EXCUSE FOR GOING IN- WHAT DANGER DID THE CONVOY POSE TO LIBYAN CITIZENS- AFTER ALL- WE WERE FED THAT LIE OVER AND OVER……………..NATO CEASES BOMBING- CLEAR REGIME CHANGE ALL ALONG…………..BLAIR HAS HAD A PRICE TAG PUT ON HIS HEAD……………………..WHEN HE GETS HIS- HOPEFULLY THE SAME GLEE WILL MEET HIS DEATH!

    http://www.youtube.com/user/RussiaToday#p/u/0/79UFRfXfMhk

  2. Libya: A Brutal, Gratuitous Slaying, the New World Order in All Its Transparent Barbarism

    by Rick Rozoff

    Global Research, October 22, 2011
    Voice of Russia and Stop NATO

    http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=27224

    “A brutal, gratuitous slaying” John Robles

    Interview with Rick Rozoff, the manager of the Stop NATO website and mailing list and contributing writer to http://www.globalresearch.ca.

    How are you today, Mr. Rozoff?

    Rather distressed by the news of this morning. Or yesterday morning in your case.

    Ok, what is your first impression?

    It was a brutal, gratuitous slaying of an almost 70-year-old man, killed after being captured. And if the intent of 216 days of NATO bombing was to kill him in the first place, which is clearly the case, with the multiple bombings of his compound in Tripoli, which in one case killed one of his sons and three grandchildren, it is clearly targeted killing and I suppose NATO can now claim success. It has got what it wanted.

    President Barack Obama said that there is going to be a pull-out from Libya very soon, so in your mind does that mean the objective has been met?

    Yes, it has entirely. Regime change, take-over of Africa’s largest oil reserves, the incorporation of Libya, which hitherto had been the only North African country that was not a member of NATO’s so-called Mediterranean Dialogue, into what is now according to Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen a military partnership with the North Atlantic Alliance…So in every sense their objective has been accomplished. It’s certainly nothing that is going to benefit the Libyan people.

    You don’t see this as being justice for the oppressed Libyan people? I mean there are people saying that Gaddafi was a terrible guy. He killed thousands so he deserved to die.

    There is just so much – what term do I want to use? – low taste, gratuitous reveling in the murder of this man, who was born 70 years ago in the very city he was murdered in on the 216th day of NATO’s bombing of his country. He was born under Italian Fascist occupation and he died under NATO occupation. I think the parallel there can’t be missed, including the fact that Italy supplied some of the warplanes that have devastated his country since the middle of March, since March 19th. If he was the monster they’ve portrayed him as being – and I invite your listeners to go to the NATO website and see some of the crude caricatures of Gaddafi they’ve posted over the last few days – wall graffiti and so forth – portraying him in a demeaning and belittling way, to further dehumanize him preparatory to murdering him.

    Alright, I saw some television coverage of his naked body being thrown around like a piece of meat. I am sorry for the expression.

    Yes, after they brought him to Misrata. This is sickening, barbaric and worse than barbaric treatment and it’s in a long line of similar travesties. This is true with Slobodan Milosevic in Yugoslavia and Saddam Hussein in Iraq, with any leader of a country that doesn’t kow-tow entirely. I am not putting all these people in the same basket. Let’s rephrase that. Any leader whose time has come according to the United States and NATO can expect death. Hussein was hanged, Gaddafi was shot. Whereas Gaddafi was considered to be – he was only nominally so, but he was considered to be – the head of state and even the head of the military, and the bombing of his private residences under the guise of their being command and control centers suggests that he was considered by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization to be in charge of the Libyan military, when he was captured on Thursday his treatment was governed by the Geneva Conventions, but instead he was shot through the head and murdered. This is the new regime that is being implanted in Libya, and for all the West’s talk of the rule of law and humanitarian concerns and so forth this is a graphic image of its true intentions, just like the death of Slobodan Milosevic in a veritable dungeon in the Netherlands because he was denied proper medical treatment in Russia, and the grotesque hanging of Saddam Hussein. This is the image of the new world order, a world order in all its transparent barbarism.

    What do you mean he was denied medical treatment in Russia?

    Russia offered to make a deal with the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia to bring Slobodan Milosevic to Moscow for medical treatment, but he was denied that opportunity and he died shortly thereafter. Even more foul play may have been involved but the message is very clear.

    Do you see a pattern, I am sorry to interrupt you there. Do you see a pattern here, I am sure you do, between Hussein, Osama Bin Laden and now Gaddafi? I mean, we have countries, for example, Hussein and Gaddafi, they pretty much stopped their weapons’ programs. They cooperated with the CIA, in this case from what I’ve heard, and it’s pretty much a given, Gaddafi was assisting the war on terror fight by the United States by allowing rendition flights to Libya. He stopped his weapons programs. Do you see a pattern here?

    Yes, there’s a very clear pattern. That the United States and the North Atlantic allance use somebody for whatever purpose they want to and then get rid of them and kill them afterwards. Slobodan Milosevic, at political risk to himself inside at that time the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, played a role in negotiating an end to the armed hostilities in Bosnia, in gratitude for which his country was bombed for 78 days in 1999 by the United States and its NATO allies and subsequently he was left to die in prison.

    He had a deal with the CIA, I think, it came out, and I think that it’s pretty much a part of the public record that he believed that he was going to be protected.

    I don’t know the details about that but at the end of the day what we see is there are a lot of corpses and we see the killings of heads of state. We have to recall that again, even though he was a titular, a nominal, head of state, Muammar Gaddafi was the longest reigning leader in the world. He is was last personal link – since Fidel Castro retired as president of Cuba – between the post-World War II national liberation struggles and the emergence of new nations during the Cold War era and the post-Cold War era that issued in NATO as an international military strike force that can topple governments at will around the world. NATO boasts on its website as of today of flying over 26,000 air missions over a country of six million people, with well over 9,000 of those being combat sorties. So this monster has been unleashed over the last 20 years and Libya will not be the last country so targeted. That you can be assured of.

    What do you think is going to happen next?

    I don’t know if Libya is able to be put back together again. The Western powers incited regional and tribal differences in order to topple the former Gaddafi government, and believing you can put that genie back in the bottle is overly optimistic – and disingenuous. With the military commander of the National Transitional Council [Abdel Hakim Belhaj] being somebody the United States incarcerated and interrogated as part of its “extraordinary rendition” program and a former fighter in Afghanistan, past leader of the so-called Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, you have al-Qaeda elements and tribal separatists – they’ve created real pandemonium here and now they claim that they want to stabilize Libya. I don’t see it happening. At the end of the day, with the alleged no-fly zone and humanitarian intervention, NATO has transparently waged a war against a government on behalf of insurgents, period. This was clearly the intent from the beginning and now it’s proven successful.

    Rick Rozoff is a frequent contributor to Global Research. Global Research Articles by Rick Rozoff

  3. IN THE WORDS OF A BRITISH SOLDIER THAT CALLED INTO LBC RADIO’S PHONE IN- RE LIBYA AND THE EU REFERENDUM NOT BEING ALLOWED………….HE SAID.

    “WHERE DOES DEMOCRACY END AND FASCISM START”?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s