The Real Reason for NATO Attacking Libya EXPOSED

Originally posted by UcDat
The NATO crime syndicate who suck back our taxes for this madness sheeple. Is killing to protect their cash monopoly.

ps Canada we just spent another 150 million on those bombs and thats not counting getting our 'boys' to drop them. With narly a whisper just another day at work? Seriously are Canadian soldiers brain dead tools of the elites just like the sheeple but on steroids.

Who are you to point the blame at the workers??? They cannot be held accountable for the crimes the establishment commits. Soldiers are the working class of the very same system that destroys the environment and sabotages the lives of people in your crumbling country. But they don't do it in full awareness or intent, they do it in the hope of having a more decent living, and a future, for themselves and their family.

For sure they are complicit. Like you are complicit to keep working for a construction project, or telecom company, or whatever, for the only reason that the system works because you work, and this way you collaborate into its invasion and destruction of Life (both human and natural life).

But to point the finger at the very working class which holds the system by the balls, it's dead wrong, although it's good to show them the madness that they collaborate to.

It's not just oil, there is the water that Libya is getting from the great man made river which is draining the underground aquifer in the Sahara.

en.wikipedia.org...

Have a read of some of the other background to water shortages in North Africa and the near East:

www.worldwatercouncil.org...

environment.newscientist.com... pg

There's also the point about new oil prospecting rights that were awarded to Russian and Chinese oil companies in the summer of 2010 at the expense of Exxon, BP, Shell, etc.

There are also vast iron ore and uranium reserves in the southern desert areas, none of the maps of the conflict in the press are showing the areas in the south adjacent to Sudan, Chad and Algeria or along the Egyptian borders. I have seen no news from Sebah or Ghadames since the conflict started.

I have read a number of articles between 2007-2010 relating to political transition in North Africa in terms of entrenched patriarchal governance - Mubarak, Ghaddafi etc. In all of these articles by respected political analysts Libya was singled out as the least likely to revolt due to a small population residing in a massive country and relative wealth and social infrastructure that made it unlikely to change political direction.

It was therefore extremely unlikely that the tenet that Ghaddaffi would fall "in a couple of days" as reported in the build up to the no fly zone could be taken as any realistic outcome. This is evident in the fact that there has been more or less a stalemate between the two revolutionary groups (1969 and 2011) in Libya. Anyone with a basic understanding of regional politics understood that the claims made in the build up to NATO action were both false and did not respect the intelligence in the region from NATO's own analysts, much like Iraq and Iran.

I might also add that Mitiga air base just outside of Tripoli has long been ear-marked for a major North African base for AFRICOM, USAF was not pleased about being kicked out in 1969.

A quick force projection exercise shows that there are large gaps in US global force projection in this region of Africa.

P.S.

France is NOT a member of NATO and France was leading the call for intervention. Kind of buggers up the NATO led conspiracy!

edit on 24/5/11 by malcr because: a PS.

Rubbish, France is a member of NATO:

www.nato.int...

Originally posted by mrlondon

P.S.

France is NOT a member of NATO and France was leading the call for intervention. Kind of buggers up the NATO led conspiracy!

edit on 24/5/11 by malcr because: a PS.

Rubbish, France is a member of NATO:

www.nato.int...

yep calling Sakozy anything other than NATO's little french poodle is a laugh

dude was and is another total tool just like Cameron and nObama

reply to post by UcDat


Is RT.com to be believed, what News feeds are actually telling the truth.

Originally posted by Doomandgloom
reply to post by UcDat

 

Is RT.com to be believed, what News feeds are actually telling the truth.

None of them are without bias RT's is pretty clear when it comes to issues relating to russia dark side. But the stuff they report about the USA are facts. If they wern't they would be discredited by the american press.

I have to say I do believe the reason for the second Gulf war was over Saddam wanting to switch to the Euro and other OPEC states joining him.

HOWEVER.

In the case of Libya, this upraising started as part of something bigger, the Arab spring, and as a result of that I cannot see it being engineered by the Americans one could perhaps argue that they have taken advantage of the situation in order to force a stop to Libya’s goal of a Gold currency. Furthermore I do not believe that Libya alone has to power to implement such as drastic change in Global currency its far to problematic. This news story also neglects to point out that the flow of currency goes both ways, if the west simply refused to accept the change and sought their oil from eastern Europe or other states how have not adopted the new currency those African states who have would collapse, I cannot see Saudi for example singing up as they like their dollars to much.

So yes sure this is interesting however I would take it with a sack full of salt. There probably is some truth to it, but I think the RT just love to hate on America and her allies and this is propaganda. I wouldn’t read too much into it.

Is war generally used to create wealth, or is greed just often used to create war? I personally don't think that there's any shortage of oil, or probably any real need for oil. I don't make the decisions though.

Originally posted by kevinunknown
I have to say I do believe the reason for the second Gulf war was over Saddam wanting to switch to the Euro and other OPEC states joining him.

HOWEVER.

In the case of Libya, this upraising started as part of something bigger, the Arab spring, and as a result of that I cannot see it being engineered by the Americans one could perhaps argue that they have taken advantage of the situation in order to force a stop to Libya’s goal of a Gold currency. Furthermore I do not believe that Libya alone has to power to implement such as drastic change in Global currency its far to problematic. This news story also neglects to point out that the flow of currency goes both ways, if the west simply refused to accept the change and sought their oil from eastern Europe or other states how have not adopted the new currency those African states who have would collapse, I cannot see Saudi for example singing up as they like their dollars to much.

So yes sure this is interesting however I would take it with a sack full of salt. There probably is some truth to it, but I think the RT just love to hate on America and her allies and this is propaganda. I wouldn’t read too much into it.

I dunno I cant think of any other reason for them to attack Libya I mean they dont care one bit about humane rights and they already had good trade relations with them not to mention they even agreed to dump their chemical weapons
Really seems to be about the money and keeping the world on the US bankroll.

Originally posted by kevinunknown
I have to say I do believe the reason for the second Gulf war was over Saddam wanting to switch to the Euro and other OPEC states joining him.

Don't forget that Mossad may or may not have told America that Saddam may have one or two of the missing South African nukes that Thatcher sent Cameron and the weapons specialist, David Kelly to take control of.

In the case of Libya, this upraising started as part of something bigger, the Arab spring, and as a result of that I cannot see it being engineered by the Americans one could perhaps argue that they have taken advantage of the situation in order to force a stop to Libya’s goal of a Gold currency.

Either taken advantage of the situation or being played a double blinder. Perhaps both.

Furthermore I do not believe that Libya alone has to power to implement such as drastic change in Global currency its far to problematic. This news story also neglects to point out that the flow of currency goes both ways, if the west simply refused to accept the change and sought their oil from eastern Europe or other states how have not adopted the new currency those African states who have would collapse, I cannot see Saudi for example singing up as they like their dollars to much.

African oil being traded in an alternative currency would have opened up the markets to greater competition. Especially a gold backed currency. Ghadaffi's influence within the African Union is, in my opinion, worrying for any foreign interest, currently used to doing business their way, in Africa.

So yes sure this is interesting however I would take it with a sack full of salt. There probably is some truth to it, but I think the RT just love to hate on America and her allies and this is propaganda. I wouldn’t read too much into it.

Sometimes, Truth is used as propaganda. I think there are a lot of reasons for NATO attacking Libya, includng America ganging up with her friends and frenemies to rampage over the world.

reply to post by UcDat


Thanks OP for posting a interesting and insightful video. I bet if everyone embraced a gold dinar, it would seriously ####off the elite, not to mention put a big dent in their wealth.

www.thedailybell.com...

I love how those who support the elite always resort to spin. Saving the world economy from Gaddafi. The worlds economy is living on borrowed time, why do we continue to flog a dead horse. I look forward to the day when the economy crashes and burns and all these rich elitist parasites lose all their wealth.

Considering how Africa is the most resourceful and exploited country on Earth, I look forward to the day when the African people empower themselves and tell the rest of the world to go take a run and jump off a cliff.

reply to post by UcDat


Yes i hundred percent agree with you we gotta stand up to the NWO or else our way of life will be ruined

reply to post by UcDat


Well.. supposedly they must not of dumped them all.

Iran may have sent Libya chemical weapon shells:

ca.news.yahoo.com...

And the demonization of Iran continues..

Originally posted by UcDat

Originally posted by ThinkingCap
reply to post by UcDat

 

Glad to see some people are standing up for this business. The more people who open their minds and walk away from apathy, the easier this transition will be.

Transition is going to be hell I'm going to get killed before I let them chip me and mine.

Until then I plan on screaming on the web about it if only to try and awaken enough of you to do something to take the beast on while we still have the freedom to do so.

You were bagged long ago, actually born that way. No need to chip you.

Until then I plan on screaming on the web about it if only to try and awaken enough of you to do something to take the beast on while we still have the freedom to do so. - UcDat

Me too!

Military men are “dumb, stupid animals to be used” as pawns for foreign policy. - Henry Kissinger, “Final Days,” a book by Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein.

Warning: Not for children - GRAPHIC


Michel Collon in Libya shows a "collateral damage".

Description of next video: Libya was planned ten years ago.

Uploaded by kevin604bc on Mar 20, 2011

U.S. General Wesley Clark (Ret.), explains that the Bush Administration planned to take out 7 countries in 5 years: Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Iran.

The invasion of Libya via the UN and the 2003 Iraq invasion were both done on March 19 as with many other military conflicts. There is an occult connection with March 19. Watch video to see.