karachiwala
Prime Minister (20k+ posts)
Re: Former CIA officer blows lid off libya fraud live on CNN..
The Libyan Crisis [Threads Merged]
- Thread starter Waseem
- Start date
QaiserMirza
Chief Minister (5k+ posts)
Re: Former CIA officer blows lid off libya fraud live on CNN..
Unfortunately, all Muslim world is supporting the foreign invaders.
Even Qatar is sending its troop to be part of the invaders.
Whom to blame, we are our own enemy.
Unfortunately, all Muslim world is supporting the foreign invaders.
Even Qatar is sending its troop to be part of the invaders.
Whom to blame, we are our own enemy.
digitalzygot
Senator (1k+ posts)
Re: Former CIA officer blows lid off libya fraud live on CNN..
Traitor Muslim leaders and as usuan axil of evil TERRORIST US AND EUROPE.
Traitor Muslim leaders and as usuan axil of evil TERRORIST US AND EUROPE.
digitalzygot
Senator (1k+ posts)
Re: Former CIA officer blows lid off libya fraud live on CNN..
Since US is supporting them they are again MUJAHEDIN not Taliban terrorist hypocrits
Since US is supporting them they are again MUJAHEDIN not Taliban terrorist hypocrits
karachiwala
Prime Minister (20k+ posts)
General: U.S. may consider troops in Libya
Army Gen. Carter Ham says ground forces wouldn't be ideal, but may be a possible way to aid rebels; Says current operation largely stalemated
(CBS/AP)WASHINGTON - The United States may consider sending troops into Libya with a possible international ground force that could aid the rebels, according to the general who led the military mission until NATO took over.Army Gen. Carter Ham also told lawmakers Thursday that added American participation would not be ideal, and ground troops could erode the international coalition and make it more difficult to get Arab support for operations in Libya.
Ham said the operation was largely stalemated now and was more likely to remain that way since America has transferred control to NATO.
Complete coverage: Anger in the Arab World
He said NATO has done an effective job in an increasingly complex combat situation. But he noted that, in a new tactic, Muammar Qaddafi's forces are making airstrikes more difficult by staging military forces and vehicles near civilian areas such as schools and mosques.
The use of an international ground force is a possible plan to bolster rebels fighting forces loyal to the Libyan leader, Ham said at a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing.
Asked if the U.S. would provide troops, Ham said, "I suspect there might be some consideration of that. My personal view at this point would be that that's probably not the ideal circumstance, again for the regional reaction that having American boots on the ground would entail."
Video: Ex-Rep. Weldon on Libya visit, Qaddafi meeting
President Barack Obama has said repeatedly there will be no U.S. troops on the ground in Libya, although there are reports of small CIA teams in the country. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates told lawmakers last week that there would be no American ground troops in Libya "as long as I am in this job."
Ham disclosed that the United States is providing some strike aircraft to the NATO operation that do not need to go through the special approval process recently established. The powerful side-firing AC-130 gunship is available to NATO commanders, he said.
Other strike aircraft, including fighters and the A-10 Thunderbolt, which can provide close air support for ground forces, must be requested through U.S. European Command and approved by top U.S. leaders, including Defense Secretary Robert Gates. Ham said that process is quick, and other defense officials have said it can take about a day for the U.S. to approve the request and move the aircraft in from bases in Europe.
Ham said recent bad weather and threats from Qaddafi's mobile surface-to-air missile systems hampered efforts to use aircraft like the AC-130 and the A-10 to provide close air support for friendly ground forces. He says those conditions contributed to the stalemate.
Since the U.S. handed off the strike mission to NATO, U.S. planes account for only 15 percent of NATO planes now doing those air attacks, Ham said.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/04/07/501364/main20051760.shtml
Army Gen. Carter Ham says ground forces wouldn't be ideal, but may be a possible way to aid rebels; Says current operation largely stalemated
(CBS/AP)WASHINGTON - The United States may consider sending troops into Libya with a possible international ground force that could aid the rebels, according to the general who led the military mission until NATO took over.Army Gen. Carter Ham also told lawmakers Thursday that added American participation would not be ideal, and ground troops could erode the international coalition and make it more difficult to get Arab support for operations in Libya.
Ham said the operation was largely stalemated now and was more likely to remain that way since America has transferred control to NATO.
Complete coverage: Anger in the Arab World
He said NATO has done an effective job in an increasingly complex combat situation. But he noted that, in a new tactic, Muammar Qaddafi's forces are making airstrikes more difficult by staging military forces and vehicles near civilian areas such as schools and mosques.
The use of an international ground force is a possible plan to bolster rebels fighting forces loyal to the Libyan leader, Ham said at a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing.
Asked if the U.S. would provide troops, Ham said, "I suspect there might be some consideration of that. My personal view at this point would be that that's probably not the ideal circumstance, again for the regional reaction that having American boots on the ground would entail."
Video: Ex-Rep. Weldon on Libya visit, Qaddafi meeting
President Barack Obama has said repeatedly there will be no U.S. troops on the ground in Libya, although there are reports of small CIA teams in the country. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates told lawmakers last week that there would be no American ground troops in Libya "as long as I am in this job."
Ham disclosed that the United States is providing some strike aircraft to the NATO operation that do not need to go through the special approval process recently established. The powerful side-firing AC-130 gunship is available to NATO commanders, he said.
Other strike aircraft, including fighters and the A-10 Thunderbolt, which can provide close air support for ground forces, must be requested through U.S. European Command and approved by top U.S. leaders, including Defense Secretary Robert Gates. Ham said that process is quick, and other defense officials have said it can take about a day for the U.S. to approve the request and move the aircraft in from bases in Europe.
Ham said recent bad weather and threats from Qaddafi's mobile surface-to-air missile systems hampered efforts to use aircraft like the AC-130 and the A-10 to provide close air support for friendly ground forces. He says those conditions contributed to the stalemate.
Since the U.S. handed off the strike mission to NATO, U.S. planes account for only 15 percent of NATO planes now doing those air attacks, Ham said.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/04/07/501364/main20051760.shtml
karachiwala
Prime Minister (20k+ posts)
War in Cities: NATO Slams Libya Forces for Being Inconvenient to Bomb
Allegations of 'Human Shields' Based on Clashes Being Inside Cities
by Jason Ditz, April 06, 2011
Libya is geographically a very large nation, with more territory than Iraq, Afghanistan and Vietnam combined. At the same time, it is a comparatively compact nation, with the population clustered along the coast and mostly in major cities.
This has left NATO in an awkward position in its efforts to bomb Gadhafian military forces engaged in combat, as with the two sides fighting over a handful of disputed cities, those forces are inevitably near large populations of civilians. Which has led to NATO charging that the military is deliberately using human shields in the war. The complaints however, center around Gadhafis tanks in Misrata being dispersed across the city and inside the city, where the fighting is and where the population is. Though the allegation of human shields sounds dramatic, all it really means is that NATO is mad the tanks arent all clustered together in the desert, making them sitting ducks for air strikes.
This has made the Libyan rebels angry, because NATO is reluctant to carpet bomb cities on their behalf. Whether the NATO grousing is an attempt to explain the complaints or to prepare the public for impending civilian killings, however, remains to be seen.
http://news.antiwar.com/2011/04/06/...-libya-forces-for-being-inconvenient-to-bomb/
Allegations of 'Human Shields' Based on Clashes Being Inside Cities
by Jason Ditz, April 06, 2011
Libya is geographically a very large nation, with more territory than Iraq, Afghanistan and Vietnam combined. At the same time, it is a comparatively compact nation, with the population clustered along the coast and mostly in major cities.
This has left NATO in an awkward position in its efforts to bomb Gadhafian military forces engaged in combat, as with the two sides fighting over a handful of disputed cities, those forces are inevitably near large populations of civilians. Which has led to NATO charging that the military is deliberately using human shields in the war. The complaints however, center around Gadhafis tanks in Misrata being dispersed across the city and inside the city, where the fighting is and where the population is. Though the allegation of human shields sounds dramatic, all it really means is that NATO is mad the tanks arent all clustered together in the desert, making them sitting ducks for air strikes.
This has made the Libyan rebels angry, because NATO is reluctant to carpet bomb cities on their behalf. Whether the NATO grousing is an attempt to explain the complaints or to prepare the public for impending civilian killings, however, remains to be seen.
http://news.antiwar.com/2011/04/06/...-libya-forces-for-being-inconvenient-to-bomb/
gazoomartian
Prime Minister (20k+ posts)
Re: War in Cities: NATO Slams Libya Forces for Being Inconvenient to Bomb
Jub Musalmanon ka bol bala hota hai to dunya mein peace, dignity, tranquility aati hai.
Jub kafiron ki dunya hoti hai to tabahai, brbadi, khoon kharaba, bhook, iflas, wars.
Kafereen aur shayateen mein koi farq nahi hai
Jub Musalmanon ka bol bala hota hai to dunya mein peace, dignity, tranquility aati hai.
Jub kafiron ki dunya hoti hai to tabahai, brbadi, khoon kharaba, bhook, iflas, wars.
Kafereen aur shayateen mein koi farq nahi hai
Re: War in Cities: NATO Slams Libya Forces for Being Inconvenient to Bomb
KARACHIWALA. I am happy that atleat your have a courage to post this and go against or favour with NATO but you should also do some courage and more BRAVE to say something about this news, why you copy and paste this without saying anything,
KARACHIWALA. I am happy that atleat your have a courage to post this and go against or favour with NATO but you should also do some courage and more BRAVE to say something about this news, why you copy and paste this without saying anything,
Re: War in Cities: NATO Slams Libya Forces for Being Inconvenient to Bomb
NATO will take over completely all muslim country one by one. There game plan is very detail and hidden that most of us will not even reach there. We are JAZABATI nation and most of us do not THINK.
Their formula is same which they are working on for last 500 years
Divide and Rule
Divide Muslim or others in smaller group or further smaller group so it become easy to control
NATO Country dont fight in their country and always go to other country and create problem
NATO contries first buy greedy leader like (Pakistan Army and Politician) and create problem and they show us that we are good people and we give you AID but behind the seen, their agenda is to take over all wealth and weaken muslim
At the end,
We are in a position where we can not DEFEND ourself, if we say something, people tell us TERRIOST
Muslim people can NOT say anything against them either they live in MUSLIM world or WESTERN world
NATO will take over completely all muslim country one by one. There game plan is very detail and hidden that most of us will not even reach there. We are JAZABATI nation and most of us do not THINK.
Their formula is same which they are working on for last 500 years
Divide and Rule
Divide Muslim or others in smaller group or further smaller group so it become easy to control
NATO Country dont fight in their country and always go to other country and create problem
NATO contries first buy greedy leader like (Pakistan Army and Politician) and create problem and they show us that we are good people and we give you AID but behind the seen, their agenda is to take over all wealth and weaken muslim
At the end,
We are in a position where we can not DEFEND ourself, if we say something, people tell us TERRIOST
Muslim people can NOT say anything against them either they live in MUSLIM world or WESTERN world
Wadaich
Prime Minister (20k+ posts)
Re: War in Cities: NATO Slams Libya Forces for Being Inconvenient to Bomb
True to the core. And here some Khudai Foujdaar are bent upon playing the role of Kharji's. May Allah (SWT) guide them.
True to the core. And here some Khudai Foujdaar are bent upon playing the role of Kharji's. May Allah (SWT) guide them.
crankthskunk
Chief Minister (5k+ posts)
People whose hearts are sealed
Brother Wadaich,
I dont know if Allah (SWT) will guide them or not, because Allah (SWT) also decreed in the Holy Quran that He (SWT) puts seal on some peoples hearts. If they are amongst those, then they will never be guided.
But we have a clear choice to make; we should stand up against them and kick them out from amongst our midst. Many rulers in Muslim world are nothing but stooges, including the criminals ruling Pakistan at the moment.
Do, you see them ever changing? I doubt it very much. They have too much at stake personally to change. They have cast their dyes in stones, by moving their looted wealth to the West. Their wealth is in danger, if they decide to change their hearts; West would freeze their assets with a blink of an eye, using any ready made excuses; excuses already used few times in recent past.
Please do not expect from Zardari, Gilani, NS and Saudis and Gulf rulers creed to change. They are amongst those whose hearts are sealed. They are deaf dumb and blind, as described in the Holy Quran.
Brother Wadaich,
I dont know if Allah (SWT) will guide them or not, because Allah (SWT) also decreed in the Holy Quran that He (SWT) puts seal on some peoples hearts. If they are amongst those, then they will never be guided.
But we have a clear choice to make; we should stand up against them and kick them out from amongst our midst. Many rulers in Muslim world are nothing but stooges, including the criminals ruling Pakistan at the moment.
Do, you see them ever changing? I doubt it very much. They have too much at stake personally to change. They have cast their dyes in stones, by moving their looted wealth to the West. Their wealth is in danger, if they decide to change their hearts; West would freeze their assets with a blink of an eye, using any ready made excuses; excuses already used few times in recent past.
Please do not expect from Zardari, Gilani, NS and Saudis and Gulf rulers creed to change. They are amongst those whose hearts are sealed. They are deaf dumb and blind, as described in the Holy Quran.
Muhammad Tauseef A. Bajwa
Senator (1k+ posts)
Libya Unrest: Ex-Afghan fighters presence amongst rebels raises fears
Libya Unrest: Ex-Afghan fighters presence amongst rebels raises fears
By Reuters
Published: April 10, 2011
Rebels check the vehicles coming from Brega at Ajdabiyah western gate April 8, 2011. PHOTO: REUTERS
DARNA:
Abdel Hakim al Hasady, a former militant fighter in Afghanistan, now recruits, trains and deploys 500 rebels fighting to topple Libyas Muammar Gaddafi.
He says he was once questioned for two months by US agents in Pakistan for suspected ties with al Qaeda which he denies and was later imprisoned in Libya for three years. The presence of Hasady and other militants among the rebels raises difficult questions for the US and other Western powers who want Qaddafis overthrow but worry that al Qaeda may establish a stronghold on the Mediterranean coast.
Qaddafi has accused al Qaeda of playing a direct role in Libyas unrest in a plot to destabilise the country and set up a regional base. He has named several insurgency leaders, including Hasady, as either being al Qaeda members or sympathisers.
Published in The Express Tribune, April 10th, 2011.
http://i1.tribune.com.pk/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Rebels-Libya-REUTERS-640x480.jpg
Libya Unrest: Ex-Afghan fighters presence amongst rebels raises fears
By Reuters
Published: April 10, 2011
Rebels check the vehicles coming from Brega at Ajdabiyah western gate April 8, 2011. PHOTO: REUTERS
DARNA:
Abdel Hakim al Hasady, a former militant fighter in Afghanistan, now recruits, trains and deploys 500 rebels fighting to topple Libyas Muammar Gaddafi.
He says he was once questioned for two months by US agents in Pakistan for suspected ties with al Qaeda which he denies and was later imprisoned in Libya for three years. The presence of Hasady and other militants among the rebels raises difficult questions for the US and other Western powers who want Qaddafis overthrow but worry that al Qaeda may establish a stronghold on the Mediterranean coast.
Qaddafi has accused al Qaeda of playing a direct role in Libyas unrest in a plot to destabilise the country and set up a regional base. He has named several insurgency leaders, including Hasady, as either being al Qaeda members or sympathisers.
Published in The Express Tribune, April 10th, 2011.
http://i1.tribune.com.pk/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Rebels-Libya-REUTERS-640x480.jpg
karachiwala
Prime Minister (20k+ posts)
Re: Libya Unrest: Ex-Afghan fighters presence amongst rebels raises fears
Sab chale ga jab tak America ka matlab hae. This man is a freedom fighter right now but once time is over we can change his label to a terrorist:lol:
Sab chale ga jab tak America ka matlab hae. This man is a freedom fighter right now but once time is over we can change his label to a terrorist:lol:
Muhammad Tauseef A. Bajwa
Senator (1k+ posts)
Re: Libya Unrest: Ex-Afghan fighters presence amongst rebels raises fears
.....................................................................................................................
Seems another 'genius' is discovered on the forum and 'who' is a 'Democrat' too!
.....................................................................................................................
Seems another 'genius' is discovered on the forum and 'who' is a 'Democrat' too!
Libya: All About Oil OR All About Banking
Several writers have noted the odd fact that the Libyan rebels took time out from their rebellion in March to create their own central bank this before they even had a government. Robert Wenzel wrote in the Economic Policy Journal:
I have never before heard of a central bank being created in just a matter of weeks out of a popular uprising. This suggests we have a bit more than a rag tag bunch of rebels running around and that there are some pretty sophisticated influences.
Alex Newman wrote in the New American:
In astatement released last week, the rebels reported on the results of a meeting held on March 19. Among other things, the supposed rag-tag revolutionaries announced the [d]esignation of the Central Bank of Benghazi as a monetary authority competent in monetary policies in Libya and appointment of a Governor to the Central Bank of Libya, with a temporary headquarters in Benghazi.
Newman quoted CNBC senior editor John Carney, who asked, Is this the first time a revolutionary group has created a central bank while it is still in the midst of fighting the entrenched political power? It certainly seems to indicate how extraordinarily powerful central bankers have become in our era.
Another anomaly involves the official justification for taking up arms against Libya. Supposedly its about human rights violations, but the evidence is contradictory. According to an article on the Fox News website on February 28:
As the United Nations works feverishly to condemn Libyan leader Muammar al-Qaddafi for cracking down on protesters, the body's Human Rights Council is poised to adopt a report chock-full of praise for Libya's human rights record.
The review commends Libya for improving educational opportunities, for making human rights a "priority" and for bettering its "constitutional" framework. Several countries, including Iran, Venezuela, North Korea, and Saudi Arabia but also Canada, give Libya positive marks for the legal protections afforded to its citizens who are now revolting against the regime and facing bloody reprisal.
Whatever might be said of Gaddafis personal crimes, the Libyan people seem to be thriving. A delegation of medical professionals from Russia, Ukraine and Belarus wrote in an appeal to Russian President Medvedev and Prime Minister Putin that after becoming acquainted with Libyan life, it was their view that in few nations did people live in such comfort:
[Libyans] are entitled to free treatment, and their hospitals provide the best in the world of medical equipment. Education in Libya is free, capable young people have the opportunity to study abroad at government expense. When marrying, young couples receive 60,000 Libyan dinars (about 50,000 U.S. dollars) of financial assistance. Non-interest state loans, and as practice shows, undated. Due to government subsidies the price of cars is much lower than in Europe, and they are affordable for every family. Gasoline and bread cost a penny, no taxes for those who are engaged in agriculture. The Libyan people are quiet and peaceful, are not inclined to drink, and are very religious.
They maintained that the international community had been misinformed about the struggle against the regime. Tell us, they said, who would not like such a regime?
Even if that is just propaganda, there is no denying at least one very popular achievement of the Libyan government: it brought water to the desert by building the largest and most expensive irrigation project in history, the $33 billion GMMR (Great Man-Made River) project. Even more than oil, water is crucial to life in Libya. The GMMR provides 70 percent of the population with water for drinking and irrigation, pumping it from Libyas vast underground Nubian Sandstone Aquifer System in the south to populated coastal areas 4,000 kilometers to the north. The Libyan government has done at least some things right.
Another explanation for the assault on Libya is that it is all about oil, but that theory too is problematic. As noted in the National Journal, the countryproduces only about 2 percent of the worlds oil. Saudi Arabia alone has enough spare capacity to make up for any lost production if Libyan oil were to disappear from the market. And if its all about oil, why the rush to set up a new central bank?
Another provocative bit of data circulating on the Net is a 2007 Democracy Now interview of U.S. General Wesley Clark (Ret.). In it he says that about 10 days after September 11, 2001, he was told by a general that the decision had been made to go to war with Iraq. Clark was surprised and asked why. I dont know! was the response. I guess they dont know what else to do! Later, the same general said they planned to take out seven countries in five years: Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Iran.
What do these seven countries have in common? In the context of banking, one that sticks out is that none of them is listed among the 56 member banks of the Bank for International Settlements (BIS). That evidently puts them outside the long regulatory arm of the central bankers central bank in Switzerland.
The most renegade of the lot could be Libya and Iraq, the two that have actually been attacked. Kenneth Schortgen Jr., writing on Examiner.com, noted thatix months before the US moved into Iraq to take down Saddam Hussein, the oil nation had made the move to accept Euros instead of dollars for oil, and this became a threat to the global dominance of the dollar as the reserve currency, and its dominion as the petrodollar.
According to a Russian article titled Bombing of Lybia Punishment for Ghaddafi for His Attempt to Refuse US Dollar, Gadaffi made a similarly bold move: he initiated a movement to refuse the dollar and the euro, and called on Arab and African nations to use a new currency instead, the gold dinar. Gadaffi suggested establishing a united African continent, with its 200 million people using this single currency. During the past year, the idea was approved by many Arab countries and most African countries. The only opponents were the Republic of South Africa and the head of the League of Arab States. The initiative was viewed negatively by the USA and the European Union, with French president Nicolas Sarkozy calling Libya a threat to the financial security of mankind; but Gaddafi was not swayed and continued his push for the creation of a united Africa.
And that brings us back to the puzzle of the Libyan central bank. In an article posted on the Market Oracle, Eric Encina observed:
One seldom mentioned fact by western politicians and media pundits: the Central Bank of Libya is 100% State Owned. . . . Currently, the Libyan government creates its own money, the Libyan Dinar, through the facilities of its own central bank. Few can argue that Libya is a sovereign nation with its own great resources, able to sustain its own economic destiny. One major problem for globalist banking cartels is that in order to do business with Libya, they must go through the Libyan Central Bank and its national currency, a place where they have absolutely zero dominion or power-broking ability. Hence, taking down the Central Bank of Libya (CBL) may not appear in the speeches of Obama, Cameron and Sarkozy but this is certainly at the top of the globalist agenda for absorbing Libya into its hive of compliant nations.
Libya not only has oil. According to the IMF, its central bank has nearly 144 tons of gold in its vaults. With that sort of asset base, who needs the BIS, the IMF and their rules?
All of which prompts a closer look at the BIS rules and their effect on local economies. An article on the BIS website states that central banks in the Central Bank Governance Network are supposed to have as their single or primary objective to preserve price stability. They are to be kept independent from government to make sure that political considerations dont interfere with this mandate. Price stability means maintaining a stable money supply, even if that means burdening the people with heavy foreign debts. Central banks are discouraged from increasing the money supply by printing money and using it for the benefit of the state, either directly or as loans.
In a 2002 article in Asia Times titled The BIS vs National Banks, Henry Liu maintained:
BIS regulations serve only the single purpose of strengthening the international private banking system, even at the peril of national economies. The BIS does to national banking systems what the IMF has done to national monetary regimes. National economies under financial globalization no longer serve national interests.
. . . FDI [foreign direct investment] denominated in foreign currencies, mostly dollars, has condemned many national economies into unbalanced development toward export, merely to make dollar-denominated interest payments to FDI, with little net benefit to the domestic economies.
He added, Applying the State Theory of Money, any government can fund with its own currency all its domestic developmental needs to maintain full employment without inflation. The state theory of money refers to money created by governments rather than private banks.
The presumption of the rule against borrowing from the governments own central bank is that this will be inflationary, while borrowing existing money from foreign banks or the IMF will not. But all banks actually create the money they lend on their books, whether publicly-owned or privately-owned. Most new money today comes from bank loans. Borrowing it from the governments own central bank has the advantage that the loan is effectively interest-free. Eliminating interest has been shown to reduce the cost of public projects by an average of 50%.
And that appears to be how the Libyan system works. According to Wikipedia, the functions of the Central Bank of Libya include issuing and regulating banknotes and coins in Libya and managing and issuing all state loans. Libyas wholly state-owned bank can and does issue the national currency and lend it for state purposes.
That would explain where Libya gets the money to provide free education and medical care, and to issue each young couple $50,000 in interest-free state loans. It would also explain where the country found the $33 billion to build the Great Man-Made River project. Libyans are worried that NATO-led air strikes are coming perilously close to this pipeline, threatening another humanitarian disaster.
So is this new war all about oil or all about banking? Maybe both and water as well. With energy, water, and ample credit to develop the infrastructure to access them, a nation can be free of the grip of foreign creditors. And that may be the real threat of Libya: it could show the world what is possible. Most countries dont have oil, but new technologies are being developed that could make non-oil-producing nations energy-independent, particularly if infrastructure costs are halved by borrowing from the nations own publicly-owned bank. Energy independence would free governments from the web of the international bankers, and of the need to shift production from domestic to foreign markets to service the loans.
If the Gaddafi government goes down, it will be interesting to watch whether the new central bank joins the BIS, whether the nationalized oil industry gets sold off to investors, and whether education and health care continue to be free.
Source: www.opinion-maker.org
By Ellen Brown
Several writers have noted the odd fact that the Libyan rebels took time out from their rebellion in March to create their own central bank this before they even had a government. Robert Wenzel wrote in the Economic Policy Journal:
I have never before heard of a central bank being created in just a matter of weeks out of a popular uprising. This suggests we have a bit more than a rag tag bunch of rebels running around and that there are some pretty sophisticated influences.
Alex Newman wrote in the New American:
In astatement released last week, the rebels reported on the results of a meeting held on March 19. Among other things, the supposed rag-tag revolutionaries announced the [d]esignation of the Central Bank of Benghazi as a monetary authority competent in monetary policies in Libya and appointment of a Governor to the Central Bank of Libya, with a temporary headquarters in Benghazi.
Newman quoted CNBC senior editor John Carney, who asked, Is this the first time a revolutionary group has created a central bank while it is still in the midst of fighting the entrenched political power? It certainly seems to indicate how extraordinarily powerful central bankers have become in our era.
Another anomaly involves the official justification for taking up arms against Libya. Supposedly its about human rights violations, but the evidence is contradictory. According to an article on the Fox News website on February 28:
As the United Nations works feverishly to condemn Libyan leader Muammar al-Qaddafi for cracking down on protesters, the body's Human Rights Council is poised to adopt a report chock-full of praise for Libya's human rights record.
The review commends Libya for improving educational opportunities, for making human rights a "priority" and for bettering its "constitutional" framework. Several countries, including Iran, Venezuela, North Korea, and Saudi Arabia but also Canada, give Libya positive marks for the legal protections afforded to its citizens who are now revolting against the regime and facing bloody reprisal.
Whatever might be said of Gaddafis personal crimes, the Libyan people seem to be thriving. A delegation of medical professionals from Russia, Ukraine and Belarus wrote in an appeal to Russian President Medvedev and Prime Minister Putin that after becoming acquainted with Libyan life, it was their view that in few nations did people live in such comfort:
[Libyans] are entitled to free treatment, and their hospitals provide the best in the world of medical equipment. Education in Libya is free, capable young people have the opportunity to study abroad at government expense. When marrying, young couples receive 60,000 Libyan dinars (about 50,000 U.S. dollars) of financial assistance. Non-interest state loans, and as practice shows, undated. Due to government subsidies the price of cars is much lower than in Europe, and they are affordable for every family. Gasoline and bread cost a penny, no taxes for those who are engaged in agriculture. The Libyan people are quiet and peaceful, are not inclined to drink, and are very religious.
They maintained that the international community had been misinformed about the struggle against the regime. Tell us, they said, who would not like such a regime?
Even if that is just propaganda, there is no denying at least one very popular achievement of the Libyan government: it brought water to the desert by building the largest and most expensive irrigation project in history, the $33 billion GMMR (Great Man-Made River) project. Even more than oil, water is crucial to life in Libya. The GMMR provides 70 percent of the population with water for drinking and irrigation, pumping it from Libyas vast underground Nubian Sandstone Aquifer System in the south to populated coastal areas 4,000 kilometers to the north. The Libyan government has done at least some things right.
Another explanation for the assault on Libya is that it is all about oil, but that theory too is problematic. As noted in the National Journal, the countryproduces only about 2 percent of the worlds oil. Saudi Arabia alone has enough spare capacity to make up for any lost production if Libyan oil were to disappear from the market. And if its all about oil, why the rush to set up a new central bank?
Another provocative bit of data circulating on the Net is a 2007 Democracy Now interview of U.S. General Wesley Clark (Ret.). In it he says that about 10 days after September 11, 2001, he was told by a general that the decision had been made to go to war with Iraq. Clark was surprised and asked why. I dont know! was the response. I guess they dont know what else to do! Later, the same general said they planned to take out seven countries in five years: Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Iran.
What do these seven countries have in common? In the context of banking, one that sticks out is that none of them is listed among the 56 member banks of the Bank for International Settlements (BIS). That evidently puts them outside the long regulatory arm of the central bankers central bank in Switzerland.
The most renegade of the lot could be Libya and Iraq, the two that have actually been attacked. Kenneth Schortgen Jr., writing on Examiner.com, noted that
According to a Russian article titled Bombing of Lybia Punishment for Ghaddafi for His Attempt to Refuse US Dollar, Gadaffi made a similarly bold move: he initiated a movement to refuse the dollar and the euro, and called on Arab and African nations to use a new currency instead, the gold dinar. Gadaffi suggested establishing a united African continent, with its 200 million people using this single currency. During the past year, the idea was approved by many Arab countries and most African countries. The only opponents were the Republic of South Africa and the head of the League of Arab States. The initiative was viewed negatively by the USA and the European Union, with French president Nicolas Sarkozy calling Libya a threat to the financial security of mankind; but Gaddafi was not swayed and continued his push for the creation of a united Africa.
And that brings us back to the puzzle of the Libyan central bank. In an article posted on the Market Oracle, Eric Encina observed:
One seldom mentioned fact by western politicians and media pundits: the Central Bank of Libya is 100% State Owned. . . . Currently, the Libyan government creates its own money, the Libyan Dinar, through the facilities of its own central bank. Few can argue that Libya is a sovereign nation with its own great resources, able to sustain its own economic destiny. One major problem for globalist banking cartels is that in order to do business with Libya, they must go through the Libyan Central Bank and its national currency, a place where they have absolutely zero dominion or power-broking ability. Hence, taking down the Central Bank of Libya (CBL) may not appear in the speeches of Obama, Cameron and Sarkozy but this is certainly at the top of the globalist agenda for absorbing Libya into its hive of compliant nations.
Libya not only has oil. According to the IMF, its central bank has nearly 144 tons of gold in its vaults. With that sort of asset base, who needs the BIS, the IMF and their rules?
All of which prompts a closer look at the BIS rules and their effect on local economies. An article on the BIS website states that central banks in the Central Bank Governance Network are supposed to have as their single or primary objective to preserve price stability. They are to be kept independent from government to make sure that political considerations dont interfere with this mandate. Price stability means maintaining a stable money supply, even if that means burdening the people with heavy foreign debts. Central banks are discouraged from increasing the money supply by printing money and using it for the benefit of the state, either directly or as loans.
In a 2002 article in Asia Times titled The BIS vs National Banks, Henry Liu maintained:
BIS regulations serve only the single purpose of strengthening the international private banking system, even at the peril of national economies. The BIS does to national banking systems what the IMF has done to national monetary regimes. National economies under financial globalization no longer serve national interests.
. . . FDI [foreign direct investment] denominated in foreign currencies, mostly dollars, has condemned many national economies into unbalanced development toward export, merely to make dollar-denominated interest payments to FDI, with little net benefit to the domestic economies.
He added, Applying the State Theory of Money, any government can fund with its own currency all its domestic developmental needs to maintain full employment without inflation. The state theory of money refers to money created by governments rather than private banks.
The presumption of the rule against borrowing from the governments own central bank is that this will be inflationary, while borrowing existing money from foreign banks or the IMF will not. But all banks actually create the money they lend on their books, whether publicly-owned or privately-owned. Most new money today comes from bank loans. Borrowing it from the governments own central bank has the advantage that the loan is effectively interest-free. Eliminating interest has been shown to reduce the cost of public projects by an average of 50%.
And that appears to be how the Libyan system works. According to Wikipedia, the functions of the Central Bank of Libya include issuing and regulating banknotes and coins in Libya and managing and issuing all state loans. Libyas wholly state-owned bank can and does issue the national currency and lend it for state purposes.
That would explain where Libya gets the money to provide free education and medical care, and to issue each young couple $50,000 in interest-free state loans. It would also explain where the country found the $33 billion to build the Great Man-Made River project. Libyans are worried that NATO-led air strikes are coming perilously close to this pipeline, threatening another humanitarian disaster.
So is this new war all about oil or all about banking? Maybe both and water as well. With energy, water, and ample credit to develop the infrastructure to access them, a nation can be free of the grip of foreign creditors. And that may be the real threat of Libya: it could show the world what is possible. Most countries dont have oil, but new technologies are being developed that could make non-oil-producing nations energy-independent, particularly if infrastructure costs are halved by borrowing from the nations own publicly-owned bank. Energy independence would free governments from the web of the international bankers, and of the need to shift production from domestic to foreign markets to service the loans.
If the Gaddafi government goes down, it will be interesting to watch whether the new central bank joins the BIS, whether the nationalized oil industry gets sold off to investors, and whether education and health care continue to be free.
Source: www.opinion-maker.org
PkRevolution
Chief Minister (5k+ posts)
Re: Libya: All About Oil OR All About Banking
Foresight, Thanks for sharing this report. This all sounds very authentique. 1.6 Million Barrel oil is 2% of world oil production and this Saudi Arab can cover alone. So there must be a different story. This report helped me lot to understand Libya war.
Currently 60 Nato countries Foreign Ministers are meeting in Berlin Germany to decide Final for Libya. France and Great Britain want war at every cost. Germany is refusing war option.
One thing which our comming generations will know that Nato is worse than Al Qaida.
Foresight, Thanks for sharing this report. This all sounds very authentique. 1.6 Million Barrel oil is 2% of world oil production and this Saudi Arab can cover alone. So there must be a different story. This report helped me lot to understand Libya war.
Currently 60 Nato countries Foreign Ministers are meeting in Berlin Germany to decide Final for Libya. France and Great Britain want war at every cost. Germany is refusing war option.
One thing which our comming generations will know that Nato is worse than Al Qaida.
Last edited:
Muhammad Tauseef A. Bajwa
Senator (1k+ posts)
Qadhafi on Tripoli streets amid NATO rifts
Qadhafi on Tripoli streets amid Nato rifts
AFP Yesterday
In this image made from TV, Libyan leader Muammar Qadhafi is seen in Tripoli. Libyan TV broadcast footage showing what it said was Libyan leader Muammar Qadhafi defiantly waving at his supporters while being driven around Tripoli standing up through the sunroof of a car. AP Photo
TRIPOLI: A defiant, fist-pumping Muammar Qadhafi toured the streets of Tripoli as western powers struggled to stay united over a Nato-led air campaign that has so far failed to budge him from power in Libya.
In an open-top 44, Qadhafi, sporting shades and a hunting hat, hailed bystanders with clenched fists on Thursday.
God, Libya, Muammar and no one else, supporters chanted as loud explosions rocked the Bab al-Aziziya neighbourhood home to Qadhafis residence and a base for most foreign journalists in the capital.
Nato initially denied it had again bombed Tripoli, but an alliance spokesman later acknowledged that raids had targeted the outskirts.
Late mission reports from pilots returning from Libya indicate there appear to be two additional strikes that were conducted at targets closer to the city of Tripoli, a Nato official told AFP on condition of anonymity.
Cracks opened up in the Western alliance as Washington rebuffed French appeals for more assistance with the enforcement of the UN Security Council resolution authorising all necessary means to protect Libyan civilians.
In a bid to put on a united front, however, British Prime Minister David Cameron, Frances President Nicolas Sarkozy and US President Barack Obama penned a joint article dismissing a Libyan future with Qadhafi as unthinkable and an unconscious betrayal by the rest of the world.
French Foreign Minister Alain Juppe made a personal appeal to US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for Washington to resume major air raids in Libya, but he said his plea was rebuffed.
I told her we needed them back, we would have liked them to return, Juppe said, adding that Clinton said US planes would continue to fly on a case-by-case basis.
With nearly 100,000 US troops fighting a grinding war in Afghanistan, Washington pulled back around 50 combat planes from Libyan operations last week after handing over control of the mission to Nato, but they have since participated in some missions to take out Qadhafis air defences.
A senior US official said the United States was performing a quarter of all missions and that it saw no need to do more on the military front.
We have said all along that we want to see allies step up and that we are certainly doing at least our fair share, the official said.
The port area of Libyas besieged third city Misrata came under heavy attack by Qadhafis forces, which fired dozens of Grad missiles and tank shells that killed at least 13 people and wounded 50, a rebel spokesman said.
The key crossroads town of Ajdabiya on the front line between the rebel-held east and the mainly government-held west, recaptured from loyalist forces over the weekend, also came under renewed assault.
At an international conference hosted by the Arab League in Cairo, UN chief Ban Ki-moon called for a political solution and immediate ceasefire, while European Union foreign policy Chief Catherine Ashton urged Qadhafi to resign immediately.
A Nato declaration said the allies strongly endorse calls for Qadhafi to leave power.
Alliance foreign ministers played down any rift after France and Britain pressed allies to contribute more combat jets to the mission and intensify the raids against regime tanks and artillery shelling civilians.
We are also sharing the same goal which is to see the end of the Qadhafi regime in Libya. And we are contributing in many ways in order to see that goal realised, said Clinton.
The US is committed to our shared mission. We will strongly support the coalition until our work is completed.
German Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle, whose country shocked allies by refusing to back the UN resolution authorising the military operation, said Nato supports the aspirations of the Libyan people.
We are united by the common goal, that we want a free and democratic Libya. The dictator Qadhafi, who started a civil war against his own people, must go, Westerwelle said at the start of a two-day meeting of Nato foreign ministers in Berlin.
The meeting came as Nato planes put on a show of force on the front line, with rebels reporting they were bombing targets on the road leading west, towards the key oil refinery town of Brega on the central Mediterranean coast.
But differences remained over the air raids against forces threatening the population, which are being conducted by just six of the 28 allies. Rebels have urged Nato to step up the air campaign as the mission has failed to shift the balance of power so far.
Nato Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen said a Wednesday meeting in Qatar of the international contact group on Libya, which promised the rebels cash and the means to defend themselves, laid out a good foundation.
We will now discuss how we can continue the military operation leading to a successful result, he said.
Qadhafi on Tripoli streets amid Nato rifts
AFP Yesterday
In this image made from TV, Libyan leader Muammar Qadhafi is seen in Tripoli. Libyan TV broadcast footage showing what it said was Libyan leader Muammar Qadhafi defiantly waving at his supporters while being driven around Tripoli standing up through the sunroof of a car. AP Photo
TRIPOLI: A defiant, fist-pumping Muammar Qadhafi toured the streets of Tripoli as western powers struggled to stay united over a Nato-led air campaign that has so far failed to budge him from power in Libya.
In an open-top 44, Qadhafi, sporting shades and a hunting hat, hailed bystanders with clenched fists on Thursday.
God, Libya, Muammar and no one else, supporters chanted as loud explosions rocked the Bab al-Aziziya neighbourhood home to Qadhafis residence and a base for most foreign journalists in the capital.
Nato initially denied it had again bombed Tripoli, but an alliance spokesman later acknowledged that raids had targeted the outskirts.
Late mission reports from pilots returning from Libya indicate there appear to be two additional strikes that were conducted at targets closer to the city of Tripoli, a Nato official told AFP on condition of anonymity.
Cracks opened up in the Western alliance as Washington rebuffed French appeals for more assistance with the enforcement of the UN Security Council resolution authorising all necessary means to protect Libyan civilians.
In a bid to put on a united front, however, British Prime Minister David Cameron, Frances President Nicolas Sarkozy and US President Barack Obama penned a joint article dismissing a Libyan future with Qadhafi as unthinkable and an unconscious betrayal by the rest of the world.
French Foreign Minister Alain Juppe made a personal appeal to US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for Washington to resume major air raids in Libya, but he said his plea was rebuffed.
I told her we needed them back, we would have liked them to return, Juppe said, adding that Clinton said US planes would continue to fly on a case-by-case basis.
With nearly 100,000 US troops fighting a grinding war in Afghanistan, Washington pulled back around 50 combat planes from Libyan operations last week after handing over control of the mission to Nato, but they have since participated in some missions to take out Qadhafis air defences.
A senior US official said the United States was performing a quarter of all missions and that it saw no need to do more on the military front.
We have said all along that we want to see allies step up and that we are certainly doing at least our fair share, the official said.
The port area of Libyas besieged third city Misrata came under heavy attack by Qadhafis forces, which fired dozens of Grad missiles and tank shells that killed at least 13 people and wounded 50, a rebel spokesman said.
The key crossroads town of Ajdabiya on the front line between the rebel-held east and the mainly government-held west, recaptured from loyalist forces over the weekend, also came under renewed assault.
At an international conference hosted by the Arab League in Cairo, UN chief Ban Ki-moon called for a political solution and immediate ceasefire, while European Union foreign policy Chief Catherine Ashton urged Qadhafi to resign immediately.
A Nato declaration said the allies strongly endorse calls for Qadhafi to leave power.
Alliance foreign ministers played down any rift after France and Britain pressed allies to contribute more combat jets to the mission and intensify the raids against regime tanks and artillery shelling civilians.
We are also sharing the same goal which is to see the end of the Qadhafi regime in Libya. And we are contributing in many ways in order to see that goal realised, said Clinton.
The US is committed to our shared mission. We will strongly support the coalition until our work is completed.
German Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle, whose country shocked allies by refusing to back the UN resolution authorising the military operation, said Nato supports the aspirations of the Libyan people.
We are united by the common goal, that we want a free and democratic Libya. The dictator Qadhafi, who started a civil war against his own people, must go, Westerwelle said at the start of a two-day meeting of Nato foreign ministers in Berlin.
The meeting came as Nato planes put on a show of force on the front line, with rebels reporting they were bombing targets on the road leading west, towards the key oil refinery town of Brega on the central Mediterranean coast.
But differences remained over the air raids against forces threatening the population, which are being conducted by just six of the 28 allies. Rebels have urged Nato to step up the air campaign as the mission has failed to shift the balance of power so far.
Nato Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen said a Wednesday meeting in Qatar of the international contact group on Libya, which promised the rebels cash and the means to defend themselves, laid out a good foundation.
We will now discuss how we can continue the military operation leading to a successful result, he said.
