US Airstrikes kill civilians

According to PressTV, the latest airstrikes by US led forces have hit civilian areas in the Libyan towns of Garyan and Mizdah, leaving scores of men and women wounded.

The Libyan government has said that since the airstrikes began, over a hundred civilians have been killed.

"Civilian and military areas in Garyan and Mizdah were hit on Monday night by the colonial and crusader aggressors," Libyan television said yesterday in a written news flash.

Puppet Government established to lead "new" Libya

American  left-wing activist and political commentator, Ralph Schoenman, has claimed that the from its inception the intervention by the US and NATO powers in Libya have been designed not to advance, but to undermine and destroy a popular movement in that country.

Schoenman has stated that the opposition forces in Libya, who have now established an "alternative" state government, are actually controlled by US and Egyptian forces. Stratford Global Intelligence confirmed that 100 Egyptian commandos have been in control of opposition forces since early March at Washington's behest. The UK SAS, US Special Forces and CIA operatives have been there according to Stratford for months.

The Irish Anti-War Movement (IAWM)  issued its statement in support of the Libyan Provisional Transitional National Council (PTNC) the day after it was revealed that the National Council had appointed Khalifa Hifter - a former colonel in the Libyan army and a long-time CIA collaborator - to head its military operations. The IAWM obviously hope that the recognition of the PTNC will result in a swift end to the conflict.

Will replacing the current regime with a more west-friendly government actually help the people of Libya or the process of democracy?

How to deal with undemocratic regimes: Israel

The UN decision to intervene in Libya was taken to protect Libyan citizens and champion democracy. At least that's what the worlds media is busy trying to convince you.

The worlds media machine will do its best to convince you that the UN took these decisions with only the noblest of intentions at heart, and that the roots of its very existence prevents it from any corruption or wrong doing. The original aims of the United Nations are "to keep peace throughout the world, to develop friendly relations between nations, to work together to help people live better lives, to eliminate poverty, disease and illiteracy in the world, to stop environmental destruction and to encourage respect for each other's rights and freedoms."

To encourage respect for each others rights and freedoms.

While the UN sponsored bombing of Libya continues, the Israeli military are launching missile attacks against the condensed civilian population of the Gaza strip. Over 10,000 Palestinians are held in detention by Israel. That's more political prisoners than China or Iran. Israel has the largest number of apartheid laws and regulations. It has one of the longest imposition of emergency laws and regulations that rob citizens of their most basic human and civil rights. Israel has imposed laws upon Palestinian citizens that prevent them from building new homes, from cultivating their land and from travelling to work or to a hospital. Israel completely bans the Palestinians from commemorating their history and culture.

The UN seems unconcerned with encouraging respect for Palestinians rights and freedoms. The UN seems unwilling to deal with a rogue nation who's insane leaders are endangering the lives of its civilian population. That rogue state is Israel, and its immunity is another clear indicator of the shameful double standards being used to justify the rape of Libya.

Double Standards: Why is Libya targeted while Saudi Dictatorship remains in place?

UN resolution 1970 gave authorisation to the Western Nations to use air strikes against Libyan forces in an effort to protect civilians. But is this International Intervention about protecting citizens, or something else?

Declarations from western powers that the military strike against Libya is motivated solely by a desire to protect the civilian population cannot be taken seriously. In Yemen, protesters have been massacred on the street, in full view of the world and the Wests "Philanthropy". No intervention has been taken in Yemen. Yemen is one of the poorest and least developed nations in the Arab world, with no valuable natural resources.

Last week, one of the richest dictatorships in the world, Saudi Arabia, invaded the small nation of Bahrain, following pro democracy demonstrations there. No action was taken against the Saudis. No Intervention was announced. The UN passed no resolution to deal with this stamping out of fledgling democracy. Saudi Arabia is an oil rich nation, and one of the West's closest allies in the Arab world. The Saudi regime bans political parties, has declared protests ‘un-Islamic’ and continues to incarcerate almost 8,000 political prisoners.

It is clear for the world to see that the "Intervention" in Libya is not about protecting the Libyan people, but rather about insuring the ready supply of oil. In 2005, Shell reached an agreement with the Libyan state oil company to explore for gas in the Sirte Basin. It is obvious that this giant multinational company will not see its investment lost, should rebels take control of Libya. Only four years ago, the British government were happy to sell missiles to the Libyan government. Hardly the actions of a nation that puts democracy and civilians safety first!



Operation Odyssey Dawn. Whos the target in Libya?

Operation Odyssey Dawn is the code name given to the military action against Libya. The reference appears to be to the Odyssey, and the long war in which the main character was fighting for ten years, before taking another ten years to get home. Why the American military would attach such a name to an operation which is supposed to be a temporary intervention is unclear, and certainly at odds with what the leaders of the Western Nations say their main aims are for Libya.

Yesterday,

British Prime Minister David Cameron secured comprehensive support from MPs for the military intervention in Libya – despite signs of friction in the Government over how to tackle Gaddafi. It emerged from yesterdays debate in the commons that the leader of Libya was not a target and that the UN had "not allowed" the removal of the leader by the Allied Nations. This leaves us with an incredible question; Just how does the United Nations justify green lighting the bombing of civilian areas but refuses to target the man who they claim is the problem in Libya?

Yesterday, David Cameron stated that the Western Nations missile bombardment had

“largely neutralised” the Libyan air defences, effectively securing a no-fly zone over the country. However last night the bombing resumed. Just what are the Western Powers bombing now?

The human cost of "democracy". Invasion of Libya continues...

Three days ago the UN passed resolution 1970, which in their own words was designed to "impose immediate measures to stop the violence, ensure accountability and facilitate humanitarian aid" in Libya.

Almost immediately, Western warplanes began bombing targets in the oil rich North African nation.

Despite the nonsense spouted by spokespeople for the Western Alliance arguing otherwise, there is absolutely no doubt that Libyan civilians have been killed in these air strikes, and more will die if the bombing is not brought to an end immediately.

The worlds media proudly announced that the passing of resolution 1970 was about setting up a No-Fly Zone over Libya to protect citizens. They did not mention that the No-Fly Zone would only apply to native aircraft, while western warplanes would be free to fly over and bomb any targets they wanted. Maybe this is why the Arab League and Russia are now have serious second thoughts about their initial support for the "Intervention".

Intervention.... or Invasion?

The only thing resolution 1970 bans the West from doing is permanently occupying Libya. They don't have the resources to do so anyway. Better that they be given the time and power to set up a friendly puppet regime to insure regional stability and ready oil supply. Forget the people of Libya who must now face the fire power of "western democracy".

I received this message from a woman who's Libyan partner is back in his homeland. I think it speaks for itself and should be a wake up call for those people who believe the UN are acting for the interests of the Libyan people;

"Throughout these 31 days of uncertainty I have never felt more afraid for my family than today.Every hour counts now,it will not be a matter of pro or anti government anymore,no one is safe.The consensus is that people who are not part of the so called 'non western society' do not feel pain,emotions,they do not feel the pain of loss of family and friends like 'us westeners' do.
Worldwide people are condemning this action.I pray that this will be the first day our voices will be heard"

These Libyan kids face the firepower of "Western Democracy"

Battle for Democracy?

Yesterday you declared war on the fourth largest country in Africa.

Whats that? You didn't start any wars yesterday. You want to know what preposterous nonsense this is?

Yesterday, on the back of United Nations (To which Ireland actively belongs) resolution 1970, several UN big guns, namely France and England, began bombing targets in Libya. They did so in the name of democracy. They did so in your name.

But are they acting on behalf of noble democracy? Do they have the best interests of the Libyan people at heart?

Resolution 1970 has been presented as the only way to save Libya and its civilians. How does a bill that allows Western powers a free hand to whatever they want, bar permanent occupation, help the people of Libya?

It cant, but it might help the west maintain and increase their dominance in one of the ten richest oil producing nations in the world. high oil revenues and a small population give Libya one of the highest GDPs per capita in Africa. Libya lies in North Africa, an area now being dubbed the southern states of the EU bu some confident Eurocrats.

Is this "International Intervention" about preserving democratic principals or saving an endangered population? Or is it about deposing on regime that's become unstable and replacing it with another one that will play ball, as oppose to a bunch of revolutionaries?

One things for certain, only you can tell the rest of the world that these people are not dropping bombs on hospitals in your name.