Our position on the events in Libya

Abdel al-Bari Atwan is the editor-in chief of the London-based newspaper Al-Quds Al-Arabi

26 April 2011

I have to admit that I am engulfed by sadness every time I come to write about
the way the Libyan situation is unfolding; when I witness the way the country is
being torn apart and how the whole nightmare is being completely mis-represented
and distorted by a huge media machine, paid for by parties with enormous funds,
and which has almost dominated Arab public opinion.

The rebellion started out in all innocence with protestors demanding freedom,
social justice and the rule of law from the Colonel Gadaffi's dictatorial
regime. The people had finally had enough of their country being treated like a
private estate by Gadaffi and his sons: even to the point where, when one of
these sanctified heirs was arrested in Switzerland, Gadaffi threatened to cut
off that country' supply of Libyan oil. He even went so far as to call for
fragmenting Switzerland and handing its parts over to Germany, Italy, and
France.

The revolution was legitimate, increasingly so when Gaddafi threatened to crush

Italy will take part in strategic bombing raids over Libya, Premier Silvio Berlusconi has said. Berlusconi's office issued a statement after the premier spoke with US President Barack Obama, saying Italy had decided to beef up its military action to better contribute to protecting civilians.

Italy had previously said it would not take part in air strikes against Libyan targets, given its 40-year colonial rule over the country. Italian aircraft and navy ships have, however, been involved in refuelling and other operations for Nato forces.

The statement stressed that Italian air strikes would only be for "specific military objectives".

Rebels have complained that Nato-led firepower has not been sufficient to help them advance against Muammar Gaddafi's forces- eircom.net news

A People Betrayed: West Launches New War for Oil in Libya

CHRIS FLOYD
Empire Burlesque
March 18, 2011

And so now, another war. Led by the United States and the religious extremists in Saudi Arabia, the UN Security Council voted to intervene on behalf of one side in the Libyan civil war. Having already armed and trained Moamar Gadafy’s armies and security forces, the Western war-profiteers have now decided to do the same for his opponents.

These opponents, it must be noted, are at present led by top players who only weeks ago were at the center of Gadafy’s murderous, repressive regime — which was itself, only weeks ago, considered a worthy partner by Western governments and business interests. As As’ad AbuKhalil — a fierce critic of Gadafy for many years –noted today, before the UN vote:

Libya is another case of selective vigilantism by the west
Bombing Tripoli while shoring up other despots in the Arab world shows the UN-backed strikes to oust Gaddafi are purely cynical

Tariq Ali
guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 29 March 2011 12.43 BST

The US-Nato intervention in Libya, with United Nations security council cover, is part of an orchestrated response to show support for the movement against one dictator in particular and by so doing to bring the Arab rebellions to an end by asserting western control, confiscating their impetus and spontaneity and trying to restore the status quo ante.

International Coalition to Ban Uranium Weapons (ICBUW)

April 4, 2011

A Very Dirty Trade-Off

The US / Saudi Deal on Libya and Bahrain

By PEPE ESCOBAR

You invade Bahrain. We take out Muammar Gaddafi in Libya. This, in short, is the essence of a deal struck between the Barack Obama administration and the House of Saud. Two diplomatic sources at the United Nations independently confirm that Washington, via Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, gave the go-ahead for Saudi Arabia to invade Bahrain and crush the pro-democracy movement in their neighbor in exchange for a "yes" vote by the Arab League for a no-fly zone over Libya - the main rationale that led to United Nations Security Council resolution 1973.