RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment

Parry writes: "In Official Washington's propaganda world, the U.S. government and its 'allies' are always standing for what's right and good and the 'enemies' are the epitome of evil doing the vilest things. But some emails to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton depicted a far different reality."

Hillary Clinton. (photo: NBC)
Hillary Clinton. (photo: NBC)

What Hillary Knew About Libya

By Robert Parry, Consortium News

13 January 16


In Official Washington’s propaganda world, the U.S. government and its “allies” are always standing for what’s right and good and the “enemies” are the epitome of evil doing the vilest things. But some emails to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton depicted a far different reality, writes Robert Parry.

o justify U.S. “regime changes,” the U.S. government has routinely spread rumors and made other dubious claims which – even when later doubted or debunked – are left in place indefinitely as corrosive propaganda, eating away at the image of various “enemies” and deforming public opinion.

Even though this discredited propaganda can have a long half-life – continuing to contaminate the public’s ability to perceive reality for years – President Barack Obama and his administration have shown no inclination to undertake a kind of HAZMAT clean-up of the polluted information environment that American citizens have been forced to live in.

A recent case in point was the emergence – in the State Department’s New Year’s Eve release of more than 3,000 emails to and from former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton – of evidence that two key propaganda themes used to advance violent “regime change” in Libya in 2011 may have originated with rebel-inspired rumors passed on by Clinton’s private adviser Sidney Blumenthal.

A March 27, 2011 email from Blumenthal reminded Clinton that “I communicated more than a week ago on this story — [Libyan leader Muammar] Qaddafi placing bodies to create PR stunts about supposed civilian casualties as a result of Allied bombing — though underlining it was a rumor. But now, as you know, [Defense Secretary] Robert Gates gives credence to it.”

Blumenthal’s email, which was slugged “Rumor: Q[addafi]’s rape policy,” then plunged ahead into his new rumor: “Sources now say, again rumor (that is, this information comes from the rebel side and is unconfirmed independently by Western intelligence), that Qaddafi has adopted a rape policy and has even distributed Viagra to troops. The incident at the Tripoli press conference involving a woman claiming to be raped is likely to be part of a much larger outrage. Will seek further confirmation.”

A month later, this bizarre Viagra-rape angle became part of a United Nations presentation by then U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice who brought up the Viagra charge in a debate about the evils of Muammar Gaddafi’s regime.

A U.N. diplomat at the closed session on April 28, 2011, told The Guardian that “It was during a discussion about whether there is moral equivalence between the Gaddafi forces and the rebels. She listed human rights abuses by Gaddafi’s forces, including snipers shooting children in the street and the Viagra story.”

On Blumenthal’s other propaganda point, it’s not clear where Defense Secretary Gates got the idea to accuse Gaddafi of “staging” scenes of U.S.-inflicted carnage, but Blumenthal’s email indicates that he was disseminating that rumor which might have been picked up by Gates, rather than independently confirmed by Gates. (It’s also true that the “staging” excuse has been used before when evidence emerges of U.S. bombs killing civilians.)

Media Self-Interest

Yet, regardless of the truth or falsity of such U.S. claims and counter-claims, the chance that someone inside Official Washington is going to review the lies and exaggerations used to rationalize a major U.S. foreign policy initiative – in this case, the violent overthrow of the Gaddafi regime – to, in effect, “clear” Gaddafi’s name is remote at best.

The few cases of the media debunking U.S. propaganda, such as exposing the made-up claims about Iraqi soldiers killing babies on incubators before the Persian Gulf War in 1990-91, are rare exceptions to the rule. Even rarer are cases when the U.S. government admits that it relied on false information, such as the intelligence community recanting its pre-invasion claims about Iraq hiding WMD stockpiles in 2002-03.

The much more common approach is to simply leave the decaying propaganda in place and move on to the next target of opportunity. There is little benefit for anyone to undertake the painstaking work of separating whatever slices of truth exist within the rot of lies and exaggerations that were used to justify some war.

The way mainstream journalism usually works in America is that a reporter who challenges U.S. government propaganda aimed at a foreign “enemy” is putting his or her career at risk. The reporter’s patriotism will be questioned amid suggestions that he or she is a “fill-in-the-blank-with-the-villain’s-name” apologist.

And since the reality – whatever it is – is usually fuzzy, there is almost never any vindication for a brave stance. So, the smart career play is to go along with the propaganda or stay silent.

A similar reality exists inside the U.S. government. Honest intelligence analysts can expect no rewards if they debunk one of these propaganda themes, especially after a number of important U.S. officials have gone out publicly and sold the falsehood to the people. Making the Secretary of State or the Defense Secretary or the President look bad is not a great career move.

France’s Designs

Plus, the propaganda themes, which stress American righteousness in standing up to foreign evil, are useful in obscuring the self-interested motives that often circle around a killing field like the one that Libya has become.

For instance, another Blumenthal memo to Clinton explained France’s political and pecuniary interests in toppling Gaddafi and thus thwarting his ambitious plans to use Libya’s oil wealth as a means of freeing parts of Africa from French domination.

In an April 2, 2011 email, Blumenthal informed Clinton that sources close to one of Gaddafi sons were reporting that “Qaddafi’s government holds 143 tons of gold, and a similar amount in silver” and the hoard had been moved from the Libyan Central Bank in Tripoli closer to the border with Niger and Chad.

“This gold was accumulated prior to the current rebellion and was intended to be used to establish a pan-African currency based on the Libyan golden Dinar. This plan was designed to provide the Francophone African Countries with an alternative to the French franc (CFA).”

Blumenthal then added that “According to knowledgeable individuals, this quantity of gold and silver is valued at more than $7 billion. French intelligence officers discovered this plan shortly after the current rebellion began, and this was one of the factors that influenced President Nicolas Sarkozy’s decision to commit France to the attack on Libya.”

The email added: “According to these individuals, Sarkozy’s plans are driven by the following issues: a. A desire to gain a greater share of Libya oil production, b. Increase French influence in North Africa, c. Improve his internal political situation in France, d. Provide the French military with an opportunity to reassert its position in the world, e. Address the concern of his advisors over Qaddafi’s long term plans to supplant France as the dominant power in Francophone Africa.”

In an earlier email, dated March 27, 2011, Blumenthal also discussed the French interests in the conflict, citing “knowledgeable individuals” who said that Sarkozy “is pressing to have France emerge from this crisis as the principal foreign ally of any new government that takes power.”

So do you think it would it be easier for the Obama administration to rally American support behind this “regime change” by explaining how the French wanted to steal Libya’s wealth and maintain French neocolonial influence over Africa – or would Americans respond better to propaganda themes about Gaddafi passing out Viagra to his troops so they could rape more women while his snipers targeted innocent children? Bingo!

Seeing No Jihadists

In selling the Libyan policy to the American people, it was also important to downplay another part of the crisis: that Gaddafi was right when he warned of the danger from Islamic radicals, including Al Qaeda’s North African affiliate, operating in eastern Libya.

Gaddafi’s original military offensive was aimed at these groups, but the Obama administration’s propagandists twisted the issue into Gaddafi supposedly committing “genocide” against the people of eastern Libya, thus requiring a U.S.-led “responsibility to protect” or “R2P” mission.

However, in the emails to Clinton, Blumenthal conveyed the actual reality – that these supposedly innocent anti-Gaddafi rebels in the east indeed included jihadist elements. He wrote: “Sarkozy is also concerned about continuing reports that radical/terrorist groups such as the Libyan Fighting Groups and Al Qa’ida in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) are infiltrating the NLC [the rebel’s National Transitional Council] and its military command.

“Accordingly, he [Sarkozy] asked [a] sociologist … who has long established ties to Israel, Syria, and other nations in the Middle East, to use his contacts to determine the level of influence AQIM and other terrorist groups have inside of the NLC. Sarkozy also asked for reports setting out a clear picture of the role of the Muslim Brotherhood in the rebel leadership.”

Blumenthal added: “Senior European security officials caution that AQIM is watching developments in Libya, and elements of that organization have been in touch with tribes in the southeastern part of the country. These [European] officials are concerned that in a post-Qaddafi Libya, France and other western European countries must move quickly to ensure that the new government does not allow AQIM and others to set up small, semi-autonomous local entities — or ‘Caliphates’ — in the oil and gas producing regions of southeastern Libya.”

In other words, the danger of Islamic terror groups exploiting the power vacuum that the Obama administration and its Western allies were creating inside Libya was well understood in March 2011, but the supposed “R2P” mission pressed ahead nevertheless.

The “R2P” advocates also turned a blind eye to evidence that black Africans working for Gaddafi’s government were being systematically rounded up and murdered. As Blumenthal reported to Clinton, “Speaking in strict confidence, one rebel commander stated that his troops continue to summarily execute all foreign mercenaries captured in the fighting.”

These so-called “mercenaries” were contractors from black Africa where many people viewed Gaddafi as a champion of the continent’s development, independent of the former Western imperial powers and the harsh demands of the International Monetary Fund. While some of these blacks were part of Gaddafi’s security structure, others were involved in construction projects.

Whatever their assignments, executing prisoners of war is a war crime – and the image of U.S.-backed rebels singling out black Africans for execution turns the pretense of an “R2P” mission on its head – or perhaps all those noble humanitarian arguments were just phony from the start.

As Brad Hoff of the Levant Report wrote, “historians of the 2011 NATO war in Libya will be sure to notice a few of the truly explosive confirmations contained in the new emails: admissions of rebel war crimes, special ops trainers inside Libya from nearly the start of protests, Al Qaeda embedded in the U.S. backed opposition, Western nations jockeying for access to Libyan oil, the nefarious origins of the absurd Viagra mass rape claim, and concern over Gaddafi’s gold and silver reserves threatening European currency.”

Reality’s Hard Sell

But it probably would have been a hard sell to the American people if the U.S. government explained the dark side of the “R2P” mission – that it involved systematic executions of blacks and rapacious Western officials grasping for oil and gold – as well as creating a vacuum for jihadists. Instead, it worked much better to promote wild rumors about Gaddafi’s perfidy.

It is in this way that U.S. citizens, the “We the People” who were supposed to be the nation’s sovereigns, are treated more like cattle herded to the slaughterhouse.

Some of us did try to warn the public about these risks. For instance, on March 25, 2011, days before Blumenthal’s emails, I described the hazard from the neocon “regime change” strategies in Libya and Syria, writing:

“In rallying U.S. support for these rebellions, the neocons risked repeating the mistake they made by pushing the U.S. invasion of Iraq. They succeeded in ousting Saddam Hussein, who had long been near the top of Israel’s enemies list, but the war also removed him as a bulwark against both Islamic extremists and Iranian influence in the Persian Gulf. …

“By embracing these uprisings, the neocons invited unintended consequences, including further Islamic radicalization of the region and deepening anti-Americanism. Indeed, a rebel victory over Gaddafi risked putting extremists from an al-Qaeda affiliate in a powerful position inside Libya.

“The major U.S. news media aided the neocon cause by focusing on Gaddafi’s historic ties to terrorism, including the dubious charge that he was behind the Pan Am 103 bombing in 1988. There was little attention paid to his more recent role in combating the surge in al-Qaeda activity, especially in eastern Libya, the base of the revolt against him.” [See’s “Neocons Regroup on Libyan War.”]

Though the 2011 concerns about Al Qaeda have since morphed into worries about its spinoff, the Islamic State, the larger point remains valid regarding Libya, which descended into the status of failed state after Gaddafi’s ouster and his brutal torture-murder on Oct. 20, 2011. Secretary Clinton greeted the news of Gaddafi’s demise with glee, exulting, “we came, we saw, he died” and then laughed. [See’s “Hillary Clinton’s Failed Libya Doctrine.”]

More than four years later, the Obama administration still struggles to piece together some order from the chaos in Libya, where Western governments have even abandoned their Tripoli embassies. Meanwhile, the Islamic State and other jihadist groups continue to expand their control of Libyan territory.

In Syria, President Bashar al-Assad has hung on despite continued efforts by the Obama administration and its regional Sunni allies to remove him. The four years of war – waged mostly by jihadists armed and financed by Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Western powers – have killed a quarter million people and made millions homeless, now spreading the Mideast’s disorders into Europe where the refugee crisis is dividing the European Union.

Of course, in the U.S. mainstream media, the Syrian deaths and destruction are blamed almost entirely on Assad, much as the conflict in Libya was blamed on Gaddafi and the U.S. invasion of Iraq was blamed on Saddam Hussein. In the world created by U.S. propaganda, it is always some other guy’s fault.

In the Syrian case, the major decaying propaganda theme that continues to contaminate public understanding of the crisis has been the accusation that Assad “gassed his own people” with sarin on Aug. 21, 2013. Although independent evidence has long been pointing in the direction of a rebel provocation, perhaps aided by Turkey, the old rotting propaganda is routinely dug up by neocons and their liberal interventionist sidekicks to justify why “Assad must go!” [See’s “The Collapsing Syria-Sarin Case.“]

In the case of Libya, Blumenthal’s emails provide a useful window into what was actually happening behind the scenes – and what Secretary of State Clinton knew.

Investigative reporter Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories for The Associated Press and Newsweek in the 1980s. You can buy his latest book, America’s Stolen Narrative, either in print here or as an e-book (from Amazon and You also can order Robert Parry’s trilogy on the Bush Family and its connections to various right-wing operatives for only $34. The trilogy includes America’s Stolen Narrative. For details on this offer, click here. your social media marketing partner


A note of caution regarding our comment sections:

For months a stream of media reports have warned of coordinated propaganda efforts targeting political websites based in the U.S., particularly in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election.

We too were alarmed at the patterns we were, and still are, seeing. It is clear that the provocateurs are far more savvy, disciplined, and purposeful than anything we have ever experienced before.

It is also clear that we still have elements of the same activity in our article discussion forums at this time.

We have hosted and encouraged reader expression since the turn of the century. The comments of our readers are the most vibrant, best-used interactive feature at Reader Supported News. Accordingly, we are strongly resistant to interrupting those services.

It is, however, important to note that in all likelihood hardened operatives are attempting to shape the dialog our community seeks to engage in.

Adapt and overcome.

Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News

+56 # RMDC 2016-01-13 14:53
This is good. Clearly the Libya operation was among the dirtiest in a very ugly series of foreign policy crimes of the neo-cons since 9-11. Hillary showed herself just a vicious and evil as any bush team member. Just replace her name with Colin Powell and Blumenthal's name with Condi Rice and the same lies would be sent out in the same way.

The US needs a regime chnage. The neo-cons have control the Washinton Regime since Reagan and the 80s. Time to wash all these neocons down the sewer.

Go Bernie.
+9 # Radscal 2016-01-13 16:53
As you likely know RMDC, Sidney Blumenthal is the father of Max Blumenthal, the famously strong critic of Israeli and US policies.

You demonstrate a clear view of these policies, so what do you make of that? Max has said that he and his father get along fabulously. Is this theater? A prodigal son?
+19 # RMDC 2016-01-13 18:35
Rad -- I did not know this. I like Max Blumenthal's work a lot. He's a terrifically courageous writer. Sidney has always been an insider -- inside the democratic imperialist machine.

I think what you describe is quite normal. My father was a good friend of Reagan and managed his campaign in his first run for CA governor (LA county chair). I met Reagan three times and was convinced from the start that he was a complete asshole and idiot. I remember once at the Reagan ranch near Santa Barbara seeing a group of strategizes talk. Reagan was silent. He clearly did not understand a word. He would make a totally irrelevant joke every few minutes. The "handlers" had a lot of patience. I was in high school then. I joined the communist party when I was 19. My dad remained a right winger, though he could never tolerate the Bush faction.
+13 # Radscal 2016-01-13 18:39
Thanks for your thoughts... and a bit of personal history. Fascinating.
+22 # lorenbliss 2016-01-13 21:09
Rad/RMDC: It seems to me there has been enough repetition of the "unintended consequences" meme that its credibility has been reduced to zero. Hence I believe we should begin asking ourselves if perhaps the allegedly "unintended" consequences are not their diametrical opposite: not only intended, but intended with profoundly Machiavellian malice aforethought to eventually justify a regional war, invasion and postwar occupation by the Empire and its puppet-states for the purposes of:

(A)-seizing all Middle Eastern natural resources;

(B)-recolonizin g the entire region under an USian viceroyalty (of course disguised as imposition of "democracy");

(C)-relying on the enormous magnitude of the required war effort to dispose of a substantial percentage of the USian homeland's "surplus" workers; and

(D)-imposing forever the domestic and foreign tyrannies essential to maintaining a global slave state, i.e., a de facto Fourth Reich, precisely as envisioned by the legions of Nazi war criminals who, after World War II, were the primary architects of capitalist governance and the present-day U.S. military/indust rial Ruling Class.

These conditions not only fulfill the (now obviously prescient) Marx/Engels/Len in prediction of capitalism necessarily morphing into imperialism but prove that to perpetuate itself, capitalism's only alternative is to become fascism or Nazism, precisely as it is now doing in the United States and its empire.
+4 # Radscal 2016-01-13 22:49
I concur completely.

Do you have an opinion on Max v. Syd?
+1 # lorenbliss 2016-01-14 00:06
No idea to what you're referring. (Since I'm not a cell-phone user -- can't afford them -- the modern practice of speaking in abbreviations often leaves me bewildered.)
+2 # lorenbliss 2016-01-14 00:15
Oh -- of course -- if you mean Sidney (note spelling) Blumenthal versus Max Blumenthal, no I don't. I pay little heed to celebrities, whether in Hollywood proper or that theater of the absurd in Washington D.C. But the answer to any question about either person should begin with recognition they are each members of the Ruling Class and are therefore bound to behave accordingly, whether in the furtherance of capitalist tyranny or the Big Lie of "democracy" by which it is sustained.
+2 # Radscal 2016-01-14 00:21
It sounds like you lean more towards the "theater" hypothesis than the son deliberately taking an opposition stand.

I've found Max's journalism on the Palestine/Israe l conflict to be excellent, so I don't know what to make of his close relationship with a father who is on the front lines of Empire.

Thanks, Lorenbliss.
+8 # lorenbliss 2016-01-14 02:53
It would not be contradictory for it to be theater and father/son (Oedipal) rivalry simultaneously. The question to ask is what the individual has done not to reform capitalism or the Empire (which is no less absurd than the notion of reforming the Gestapo), but rather what he or she has done to contribute to Working Class empowerment.

My apology if this sounds bookishly doctrinaire, but given my personal history -- age 75; 55 years a professional journalist; involvement with the major humanitarian movements of the postwar 20th Century including the Civil Rights Movement (for which I once went to jail); involvement also with Occupy -- I read the message in the defeat of all these movements: that only socialism can save our species from enslavement and eventual extinction by capitalism, and only Marxism has the ideological discipline to do it.
-1 # JoaquinWalking 2016-01-16 16:10
Whoa! This all happened under President Barack Obama's leadership. Where do you figure the "neo-cons" were involved?
+21 # bsimpich 2016-01-13 18:27
Sid Blumenthal how can you do this? You are the guy who wrote "Government By Gunplay", one of the few authors who takes US assassinations head-on.

Now you work for Ms. We Came - We Saw - He Died.

It makes me sick.

Bernie is not strong on foreign policy, but at least he's not a monster like Ms. Clinton. Why don't you listen to your dad? More to the point, why don't you quit?
+20 # lorenbliss 2016-01-13 21:30
"Monster" is indeed the correct noun for someone who cackles at a man being tortured to death by anal rape with bayonets and combat knives -- which is how Gaddafi was reportedly slain.

Another suitable term is "moral imbecile." Likewise "sadistic psychopath."

Ah, yes, a fine lot indeed, our Imperial Ruling Class; Nero, Caligula, Countess Bathory and Herr Doktor Mengele would all be proud.
-8 # bmiluski 2016-01-14 09:26
Oh, for the love of God!!!!!!!!!!!! 1
0 # ericlipps 2016-01-13 18:45
"Bernie is not strong on foreign policy but at least he's not a monster like Hillary." Don't you mean like Sidney Blumenthal? Isn't he the source of the (bogus) information on which
then-Secretary of State Clinton acted?
"Why don't you listen to your dad?" See above.
+36 # PABLO DIABLO 2016-01-13 19:01
Mr. President,
You could have been great. Instead, you tossed a few crumbs to the liberals, caved in on "single payer", let the Neocons guide you back into Iraq, continue Afghanistan, destroy Libya, won't come clean about Ukraine, and start another "undeclared" war in Syria. On top of the Nobel Peace Prize you okayed $1Trillion ($1,000,000,000 ,000 dollars) to develop new Nuclear Weapons. Those are just a few reasons I can't stand with you. I am standing with Bernie Sanders
-5 # bmiluski 2016-01-14 09:28
Yeah, well wait until Bernie is faced with the same obstructionalis m that President Obama faced. (And believe me he will.) Then let's see how much Bernie gets accomplished.
+6 # Inspired Citizen 2016-01-13 19:32
This story was just added to our long list of stories about neo-liberal #CorporateClint on to share with Hillarybots.
+13 # Shades of gray matter 2016-01-13 19:39
We KNEW Arab Spring in Libya was crap, as was a "moderate" opposition. Now we see the French Connection. Probably heroin in Libya, W. Africa. And France wonders why they were targeted. Those emails may get Hillary yet.
+20 # Salus Populi 2016-01-13 20:31
I find it interesting that just as with Saddam Hussein's foray into Kuwait, which was passively encouraged by our envoy over there, followed by his demonization, likewise Qaddafi had been welcomed into the community of nations for abjuring the atom bomb and committing to fight terror. Same thing, for that matter, with Putin and the Sochi Olympics, followed immediately with the first step towards making Ukraine a neo-Nazi regime fully integrated into NATO.

The moral: beware of Western envoys' metaphorically inviting you to dinner; the soup is undoubtedly poisoned.
+17 # Anonymot 2016-01-13 20:57
Articles like this should find their way into regional paper like the Des Moines Register, the Concord Monitor, etc. Those who think Mrs. Clinton knows anything about foreign affairs need to be briefed clearly on what she actually did as SOS from 2009 to 2013.
0 # JoaquinWalking 2016-01-16 16:27
Dude! Who do you think owns those "regional papers"?

Why do you think not a single "regional paper" published a single story about France's war in Chad during the 1960's?

Why do you think not a single American news outlet published the fact that the Jordan river originates in the "Golan Heights". Or that in the 1960's Israel diverted the Jordan River so that total flow goes into Israel? Or that Syria was so enraged by this that it threatened to divert the flow of the Jordan River at its origin in the "Golan Heights" after Israel's diversion of same? Which caused Israel to attack Syrian in the 6 Days War in 1967?

Recommended reading: Suez-The Twice-Fought War-A History 1970 by Kennett Love.
+8 # Activista 2016-01-14 00:08
Great information from Parry and GREAT comments -

"The US needs a regime chnage. The neo-cons have control the Washinton Regime since Reagan and the 80s. Time to wash all these neocons down the sewer. "
We need facts/informati on in this age of PROPAGANDA.
-1 # JoaquinWalking 2016-01-16 16:17
Whoa! This all happened under President Barack Obama's leadership. Where do you figure the "neo-cons" were involved?
+5 # diamondmarge7 2016-01-14 07:39
Those of us who support BERNIE must get off our duffs and DO SOMETHING. I suggest, first, taking the pledge:;phonebanking NOW to IOWA&NH&especia lly to SC where my fellow citizens, illiterate re politics, support the Lying, Greedy SlickWillieShil larytheHawk. If the corrupt DebbieWasserman Schultz'heavy thumb on the scales manages to shove SWStH into the Dems'nomination slot, then we must write in BERNIE if our state allows it OR VOTE GREEN if our state does not. SC allows it so I will write in BERNIE if I have to. But before that outcome happens, I am doing all I can to support BERNIE being the nominee. As nominee, he beats all Rethuglicans hands-down. The problem is getting the Dems' nomination despite the rigged DNC.
+5 # John Escher 2016-01-14 14:40
I think Parry's claim that the propaganda he's speaking of is "discredited" is entirely justified. Maybe I haven't read everything in the world and that's the trouble, but on the other hand I read a lot and haven't seen any challenges to the assertion that Nuland and Powers answering to Clinton instigated the Ukraine War. The lack of counterclaim reinforces my opinion of this and other accounts of Clinton's propensity for foolish regime change.

In this article I also like such telling terms as "contamination" and "deformation" (of the truth).

The Ukraine story is parallel to the subject matter in this article.
+3 # Dale 2016-01-15 07:39
By the end of 2011 there were 1700 armed militia groups operating in different regions and communities in Libya, fighting each other, and out to kill Qaddafi. NATO had unleashed endless bomb attacks.
Qaddafi, overwhelmed by the bombings and the well-armed Islamic insurgency went into hiding. Located by NATO Special forces with their technology, Sitre where he was in hiding was carpet bombed. Mercenary militants were called in and killed him by sodomization with a bayonet. AmeriKa´s Diplomat-In-Chi ef, Hillary Clinton, busy advocating taking care next of Syria´s Assad and overseeing the arming of Islamic militants there, took a moment to be sage: “We came, we saw, he died.” And this person who celebrates murder of a head of state is designated to be the next President of AmeriKa Inc.
The results of the Libya attack, like Iraq and Somalia, is a country, no longer a nation, in total sectarian conflict of armed groupings, political stalemate, and social disarray, with Islamic extremists the dominant forces. The provisional central government, manned by neoliberal technocrats, is impotent.
0 # JoaquinWalking 2016-01-16 16:15
A nice article but this information was on StormCloudsGath two years ago.

Check it out:

Enjoy! Your tax dollars paid for it!

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.