Hiding US Lies About Libyan Invasion

Exclusive: In 2016, when a British parliamentary report demolished the excuse for the U.S. and its allies invading Libya in 2011, it should have been big news, but the U.S. mainstream media looked the other way, reports Joe Lauria.

By Joe Lauria

(Updates to show that a Times story was published.)

In George Orwell’s 1949 dystopian novel 1984, the protagonist Winston Smith’s job was to delve into The Times of London archive and rewrite stories that could cause trouble for the totalitarian government ruling Britain. For instance, if the government made a prediction of wheat or automobile production in their five-year plan and that prediction did not come true, Winston would go into the archives and “correct” the numbers in the article on record.

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

In writing a response the other day to a critic of my recently published book on Hillary Clinton’s electoral defeat, I was researching how the U.S. corporate media covered a 2016 British parliamentary report on Libya that showed how then Secretary of State Clinton and other Western leaders lied about an impending genocide in Libya to justify their 2011 attack on that country.

Using a combination of different keywords, I searched The Washington Post archives but came up with no story on the parliamentary report at all. A search of The Los Angeles Times archives likewise came up empty.

The New York Times had a dispatch from London. But it laid the blame entirely on the British and French governments, as if the U.S. had nothing to do with the devastation of Libya on false pretenses. The U.S. gave the same false war rationale as the British and French did. But The New York Times never held U.S. officials to account for it.

Ignoring or downplaying a story is one way U.S. corporate media deliberately buries news critical of American foreign policy. It is often news vital for Americans to understand their government’s actions abroad, actions which could mean death or life for U.S. soldiers and countless civilians of other lands.

British newspapers widely covered the story. As did the International Edition of CNN, which has separate editors from CNN’s U.S. website. An online search found no domestic CNN story. There’s also no video online indicating that CNN domestic or CNN International television reported the story.

The Asia edition of The Wall Street Journal had a story. It’s not clear if it appeared in the U.S. edition. Newsweek ran a story online. But it does not mention the United States even once.

Ousted Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi shortly before he was murdered on Oct. 20, 2011.

It is a black mark on the Congress’ two foreign affairs committees that neither undertook a similar inquiry (although congressional Republicans did obsess over the Sept. 11, 2012 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, which occurred about a year after the Obama administration facilitated the military overthrow and brutal murder of Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi).

Voice of America, which broadcasts outside the United States, ran a story on its website about the British parliamentary report, though the article confined criticism of the U.S. to not being prepared for the aftermath, not for the intervention itself.

A thorough online search shows that The Nation magazine and several alternative news sites, including ConsortiumNews and Salon, appear to be the only U.S.-based media that accurately covered the blockbuster story that undermined the entire U.S. narrative for leaving Libya a failed state.

Rationale for an Attack

The United States peddled its false story of a coming genocide in Libya under the doctrine of Responsibility to Protect to justify military intervention. On its face R2P appears to be a rare instance of morality in foreign and military policy: a coalition of nations with U.N. Security Council authorization would take military action to stop an impending massacre. It would have been hard to argue against such a policy in Libya if indeed its genuine purpose was to stop a massacre, after which the military operation would withdraw.

President Barack Obama at the White House with National Security Adviser Susan Rice and Samantha Power (right), his U.N. ambassador and a major advocate for R2P interventions. (Photo credit: Pete Souza)

But that is not where it ended. While arguing that intervention was necessary to stop a massacre in Libya, the real intent, as the British report says, was regime change. That’s not what American officials said at the outset and what corporate media reported.

“In the face of the world’s condemnation, [Libyan leader Moammar] Qadhafi chose to escalate his attacks, launching a military campaign against the Libyan people,” President Barack Obama told the nation on March 28, 2011. “Innocent people were targeted for killing. Hospitals and ambulances were attacked. Journalists were arrested, sexually assaulted and killed. … Cities and towns were shelled, mosques were destroyed, and apartment buildings reduced to rubble. Military jets and helicopter gunships were unleashed upon people who had no means to defend themselves against assaults from the air.”

Hillary Clinton, who according to leaked emails was the architect of the attack on Libya, said four days earlier: “When the Libyan people sought to realize their democratic aspirations, they were met by extreme violence from their own government.”

Sen. John Kerry, at the time chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, chimed in: “Time is running out for the Libyan people. The world needs to respond immediately.”

Mustafa Abdul Jalil, head of a transitional council that the U.S., U.K. and France recognized as the legitimate Libyan government, pleaded for a no-fly zone. The University of Pittsburgh–educated Jalil was playing the same game as Ahmed Chalabi had in Iraq. They both sought U.S. military might to bring them to power. He said that if Gaddafi’s forces reached Benghazi they would kill “half a million” people. “If there is no no-fly zone imposed on Qadhafi’s regime, and his ships are not checked, we will have a catastrophe in Libya.”

Report Tells a Different Story

And yet the summary of the September 2016 Foreign Affairs Committee report says: “We have seen no evidence that the UK Government carried out a proper analysis of the nature of the rebellion in Libya. … UK strategy was founded on erroneous assumptions and an incomplete understanding of the evidence.”

President Barack Obama and British Prime Minister David Cameron talk at the G8 Summit in Lough Erne, Northern Ireland, June 17, 2013. (Official White House Photo by Pete Souza)

The report further said: “Despite his rhetoric, the proposition that Muammar Qadhafi would have ordered the massacre of civilians in Benghazi was not supported by the available evidence. While [he] certainly threatened violence against those who took up arms against his rule, this did not necessarily translate into a threat to everyone in Benghazi. In short, the scale of the threat to civilians was presented with unjustified certainty.”

The committee pointed out that Gaddafi’s forces had taken towns from rebels without attacking civilians. On March 17, two days before NATO’s assault began, Gaddafi told rebels in Benghazi to “throw away your weapons, exactly like your brothers in Ajdabiya and other places did. They laid down their arms and they are safe. We never pursued them at all.” The Libyan leader “also attempted to appease protesters in Benghazi with an offer of development aid before finally deploying troops,” the report said.

In another example, the report indicates that, after fighting in February and March in the city of Misrata, just one percent of people killed by the Libyan government were women or children. “The disparity between male and female casualties suggested that Qadhafi regime forces targeted male combatants in a civil war and did not indiscriminately attack civilians,” the report said.

How then could The New York Times and The Washington Post, the most influential American newspapers, either refuse to adequately cover or not cover at all a story of such magnitude, a story that should have been front page news for days? It was a story that undermined the U.S. government’s entire rationale for an unjustified attack that devastated a sovereign nation.

There can be only one reason the story was ignored: precisely because the report exposed a U.S. policy that led to a horrible crime that had to be covered up.

History Spiked

Defending U.S. policy appears to be the underlying motive of U.S. news coverage of the world. The Libya story is just one example. I’ve had personal experience of editors rejecting or changing stories because it would undermine U.S. foreign policy goals.

Journalist James Foley shortly before he was executed by an Islamic State operative in 2014.

I twice pitched a story about a now declassified Defense Intelligence Agency document warning of the rise of a U.S.-backed Salafist principality in eastern Syria, intended to pressure Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, that could join with Iraqi extremists to become an “Islamic State,” two years before it happened. My story was twice rejected. It would have undermined the entire American narrative on the War on Terror.

On another occasion, I wrote several articles about the lead-up to a U.N. vote to grant Palestine Observer State status. In each article I mentioned that 130 countries already recognized Palestine as a state and many had diplomatic relations, including Palestinian embassies in their capitals. That essential fact in the story kept getting cut out.

Another story I wrote was spiked about the position Russia, Syria and Iran took on who was responsible for the chemical weapons attack outside Damascus in August 2013. The story also included an interview with a Congressman who demanded to see U.S. intelligence backing its accusation against Assad.

Telling both sides of a story is Journalism 101. But not evidently when the other side is a perceived enemy of the United States. There are only interests in international affairs, not morality. A journalist should not take sides. But American journalists routinely do in international reporting. They take the “American side” rather than neutrally laying out for the reader the complex clash of interests of nations involved in an international dispute.

Downplaying or omitting the adversary’s side of the story is a classic case of Americans explaining a foreign people to other Americans without giving a voice to those people, whether they be Russians, Palestinians, Syrians, Serbs, Iranians or North Koreans. Depriving a people of their voice dehumanizes them, making it easier to go to war against them.

One can only conclude that U.S. corporate media’s mission is not to tell all sides of an international story, or report news critical of U.S. foreign policy, but instead to push an agenda supporting U.S. interests abroad. That’s not journalism. That’s instead the job Winston Smith did.

Joe Lauria is a veteran foreign-affairs journalist. He has written for the Boston Globe, the Sunday Times of London and the Wall Street Journal among other newspapers. He is the author of “How I Lost By Hillary Clinton” published by OR Books, from which part of this article was adapted. He can be reached at [email protected] and followed on Twitter at @unjoe.

100 comments for “Hiding US Lies About Libyan Invasion

  1. July 17, 2017 at 21:02

    The Mafia-State Wants You!
    For as long Western, Liberal, Parliamentary Democracies continue to misbehave like tyrannical bullies misusing their superior military powers through agencies originally designed for Defence like NATO and willfully creating false premises to attack “convenient” enemies we can no longer consider ourselves “advanced societies”. We have failed to emulate even Genghis Khan, for we have become “New & Far Worse, Barbarians”! Political criminals are running rough shod of diplomacy and International Law to the point where true, self appointed tyrants appear to be a lesser evil. If, the so called New World Order, has indeed supplanted our old, time tested, Democratic Institution hijacking the “Free World” then, let’s stop pretending and either accept this “New Deal’ or get rid of these middle “Dealers’ by not voting for them, again and again, for they’re gearing up to kill, rather than save any of us, non “elitists”! When they’ll come for the “Upper Middle Classes” by then, it will be too late to even react, you “poor”, disillusioned ones who have so far adhered to your…: ” F… you, Jack, I’m OK”!

  2. Peter J Taylor
    July 13, 2017 at 03:46

    Take a bow Joe Lauria for having the professional nouse to report facts, it is facts the readers in free thinking societies need in order to ensure criminal behaviour is called out and consequently when proven they are called to account. The world is sickened and tiring of the lies in our collective names to justify regime change , the complete illegitimate brutalising of a peoples comprising a sovereign state duly constituted by out of control successive paranoid Governments representative of the U.S
    Just what right does the U.S have to impose its twisted version of democracy on people’s who have not sought or asked for said democracy , it’s amazing that a country that purports to uphold individual freedoms and peace actually is so retarded in its thinking its focus is to destroy peace and freedoms at all costs. The American state is a proven nation of bully’s and warmongers whose sole purpose you could say going back to even Pre its founding was predicated on violence , the more the better.
    If it wasn’t real it would actually be laughable , the final act in a Machiavellian plot that seems to have beset the U.S ever since that fateful coming together with the only president J.F.K who had the courage to challenge the Murdererous Shadow Governments power and control assassinated and as the saying goes you need not be an Einstein or to have a Aeronautical Engineering degree to actually see that murder for what it represented and to actually join the dots .
    It is a stain on the world indeed that the U.S actually enjoys the economic privilege it has for so long and even that day of reckoning is drawing near. We are witnessing the end of a country blessed with so much who with its acolyte racist state Israel always salivating indeed drool is a better moniker to describe that excuse of a country to whom it seems no ask is to big to give and that is only ever always wishing to do its bidding and dirty work, the tide will eventually turn , indebtedness will be the U.S’s final death knell , shame then the elites and Israelis will as always abondon positions with the dexterity of a Moscow Ballet dancer in a bid to escape the revenge of the classes and fellow citizens looked down upon with disdain for so long yet it is those very humble beings who will mete out the final justice and just as every revolution underwrites the rebirth of any nation the world hopes the rebirth of the U.S is never again ever allowed to be reborn for its war crimes , state sanctioned murders , assassinations in numbers to many to comprehend , the countless innocent souls or collateral who are unfortunate to succumb in all conflicts contrived under the auspices of plain flat lies , a nation whose Weapons so contrived , that themselves even at gestation phase is an assault to rational thinking people’s the world over in terms of the destruction able to be wrought , so the world says to the U.S and its acolytes your kind are not wanted , you bring nothing to the table of humanity , your kind of shallow righteousness is not wanted under any guise , break apart as your union is sure to and there remain bought down to reality by your own greed , inept , immoral behaviours the greatest nation ever known to civilisation on so many basis destroyed by the few for the fewer. Good Riddance and that immortal song hallelujah to be played and sung at such time will for certain , have never sounded better.

  3. LJ
    July 10, 2017 at 15:11

    Sliman Bouchuiguir, Libyan Ambassador to Switzerland. CIA Asset. Read about his role regarding media conditioning leading up to R2P in LIbya. I fact checked myself. His last name was tough to remember.

  4. David Walters
    July 10, 2017 at 09:19

    Absolutely right but for one thing. The condemnation doesn’t go far enough.

    To “go far enough” the condemnation would not merely single out fealty to American foreign policy by the media. Rather, it would include fealty to neoliberalism, atlanticism, globalism and interventionism.

  5. July 10, 2017 at 07:29

    Clinton/Obama/Cameron/Sarkozy/bush/rummy/feith/cheney/wolfowich/ et al committed genocide on a grand scale the Nazis paid with their lives why not them

    • Peter J Taylor
      July 13, 2017 at 03:57

      Absolutely correct Gussos but not being a Signatory to the International Courts of Justice at The Hague ensures they remain untouchable for now, Spain actually prosecuted charges related to the War in Iraq as did Italy I understand , however I remain unsure as to the outcome of the proceedings bought. But as you yearn for that cabal to be bought to justice so goes all right thinking people’s the world over. Until the United Nations actually does its job and calls these murderous , inhumane and just plain evil dilitantes to account there will always be agitation against the deafening silence of the various global institutions who really are nothing other than themselves poor excuses for anything resembling the humanities. Go ….. on ….. always !

  6. exiled off mainstreet
    July 10, 2017 at 01:23

    Hillary Clinton’s role in the Libya debacle would set her up for war crimes prosecution if the Hague office were not part and parcel of yankee world dominance.

  7. l kay
    July 9, 2017 at 22:06

    This excellent article provides highly significant examples of the MSM pushing” an agenda supporting U.S. interests abroad.” Of course those are imperial interests diametrically opposed to the interests of the American people in preserving a democracy in which their consent matters. Those imperial interests are pretty much identical to the pluotcratic interests which the MSM also serves on domestic policy to maintain their corrupt overthrow of democratic governance. In other words the MSM promotes the interests of the enemies of democracy in both their foreign and domestic interests.

  8. LJ
    July 9, 2017 at 17:01

    I did a search a while ago for Dr. Slimon Boulichar, I think the name was. He was a US Citizen of Libyan descent . Perhaps I had the name wrong. He had written for the CIA long ago in an economic treatise of sorts as I recall. Maybe I lost the name. After the couip in Libya and Gaddafi was killed Boulichar was rewarded by becoming LIbyan Ambassador to Switzerland. He was the front man at the start appearing at conferences and talking to news media even Congress I believe peddling stories like : The African Mercenaies in Yellow Construction hats who were supposedly driving around and killing at terrorizing people in Tripoli which was a total lie but was never retracted in the New York Times and even on Alternative Radio like Pacifica . All trace of this guy seems to have disappeared in the media as well. He was a prominent spokesman for the urgent need of the US Government and it;’s allies to engage in R2P. A total CIA asset. The Regime Change in Libya worked because of the No Fly Zone which quickly became license to kill for US Air Command and We did Big Time. Maybe 30,000 killed.. No stories there either. Reminiscent of the retreating Convey that was torched in Iraq after the first Desert Storm which was clearly a Crime Against Humanity. Memories fade so correct the narrative by wiping the slate clear. Ignorance is Strength. War is Good. i

    • LJ
      July 10, 2017 at 15:14

      Sliman Bouchuiguir, He is the guy , fact checked myself, Sorry for double posting I thought I was editing my typos. He’s still Ambassador to Libya. Can you say, Swiss Bank Accounts.

  9. LJ
    July 9, 2017 at 16:57

    I did a search a while ago for Dr. Soliman Boulichar, I think the name was. He was a US Citizen of Libyan descent . Perhaps I had the name wrong. He had written for the CIA long ago in an economic treatise of sorts as I recall. Maybe I lost the name. After the couip in Libya and Gaddafi was killed Boulichar was rewarded by becoming LIbyan Ambassador to Switzerland. He was the front man at the start appearing at conferences and talking to news media even Congress I believe peddling stories like : The African Mercenaries in Yellow Construction Hats who were supposedly driving around and killing and terrorizing people in Tripoli was a total lie but was never retracted in the New York Times and even on Alternative Radio like Pacifica . All trace of this guy seems to have disappeared in the media as well. He was a prominent spokesman for the urgent need of the US Government and it;’s allies to engage in R2P. A total CIA asset. The Regime Change in Libya worked because of the No Fly Zone which quickly became license to kill for US Air Command and We did Big Time. Maybe 30,000 killed.. No stories there either. Reminiscent of the retreating Convey that was torched in Iraq after the first Desert Storm which was clearly a Crime Against Humanity. Memories fade so correct the narrative by wiping the slate clear. Ignorance is Strength. War is Good. i

  10. Burt
    July 8, 2017 at 22:20

    Gadaffi gave up wmd and centerfuges in exchange for agreements with Bush that he would not be harmed. He checked the flow of illegal immigrants from north Africa into Europe (Out of control in 2016-2017).

    Hillary Clinton and her cabal decided to assassinate an agent of the U.S. government.

    North Korea and Iran will probably not surrender WMD willingly after seeing the example of Gaddafi.

    Reminds you of when Rumsfeld met Saddam and shook hands with him before cooperating and intelligence sharing

  11. July 8, 2017 at 20:41

    Most licensed clinical psychotherapists are grounded in basic mental-health training axioms, including: “Many cases of extreme anxiety and psychoses are rooted in distortions, dis-information, and deliberately destructive lies”. These falsehoods diminish the capacity of those who are targeted for control, pacification, or rejection. Eventually, the recipients of repeated lies are unable to discriminate between objective facts that describe reality, and the internalized lies that create a falsified, fictional world. Once the internalized world of fiction is accepted as factual, cognitive dissonance grips the victim of repetitive lies. Cognitive dissonance is anxiety that results from simultaneously holding contradictory attitudes and beliefs. Victims of the lies, peddled as “facts” by elected or appointed government agents, simultaneously are confronted with contradictory facts and conclusions. Those who are devoid of critical-thinking skills, generally are impressionable possessors of weak egos. They are the ones most likely to accept government lies, slogans, and propaganda as “the truth”. They are the most likely to join the Army to kill strangers in strange lands, in exchange for a paycheck, a uniform, and three meals a day, Those with a history of “super-sensitivity”, who cannot reconcile what they see, with the lies successfully fed to them by government agents via the mainstream media, are the most likely to exhibit signs and symptoms of severe anxiety or psychosis. Hiding lies about the Libyan invasion is a government recipe for creating mass-anxiety in the American people. They must be kept primed for “the endless war on terror” racket. This is the racket that crucifies 3rd world nations, creates tragic, suicidal “Wounded “Warriors”, and magnifies the wealth of the sociopathic operators entrenched in the mi;itary/industrial complex. Yes. The same military/industrial complex, that President Dwight D. Eisenhower gave us in his warning in January 1961: “In the councils of government we must guard against the the acquisition of unwarranted influence by the military/ industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense, with our peaceful methods ands goals….Left un-checked, this complex could become a threat to humanity itself”,

    • Realist
      July 9, 2017 at 01:07

      Unless one is prepared to believe that his parents, teachers, counselors and leaders are willful liars or unwitting sell-outs in the service of a fabricated reality, one is not capable of being a genuine dissident. That is why there are so few. Most prefer living in the comfort of the Matrix even if they suspect its falsity. There are a ton of platitudes to express the notion. “You can’t fight city hall.” “You’ve got to go along to get along.” “Don’t make waves.” “The nail that sticks out gets hammered down.” And so forth… The search for truth is a lonely road. Insisting that it prevails is often suicidal.

      • David Walters
        July 10, 2017 at 09:24

        Quite true.

        Such things make it very had to take the high road. I know. I’ve tried many times. Raising objections to obvious and deliberate falsehoods and wrong doing seems a compulsion for me.

        And, boy have I been hammered down…repeatedly.

  12. Kieron
    July 8, 2017 at 17:22

    I don’t know who said it, but I believe it’s true. Control the information ( media) and you control the world. True, but the world is waking up. There are hundreds if not thousands of news, opinion blog sites out there now. You can read and make up your own mind. If you have a mind, make it up.. because when the big boys think you are becoming a problem, they will turn off your media access. Don’t throw away your books.

  13. Gregory Herr
    July 8, 2017 at 14:16

    “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.”


    • Skip Scott
      July 9, 2017 at 08:15

      Ah yes, the real reason we turned Gaddafi into a genocidal devil who had to be removed.

  14. July 8, 2017 at 13:32

    To HIDE BEHIND, I disagree with you about Hillary Clinton’s supporters being responsible for her ascent to political stardom. She worked doggedly at it for years and will never give up being a star political character. Humans are the “moral animal”, as philosophers have argued through the ages. Each person has responsibility for his/her moral character. In this media age, people can be conditioned to fall for propaganda lies being fed daily, or they can choose to search for the truth of a matter. We have completely embraced the era of “One-Dimensional Man” of 1960s Marxist philosopher Herbert Marcuse when we could be so much greater developed. And I do agree that the American populace are herd animals, but I ask myself constantly, why are some of us exceptions to that?

    • LarcoMarco
      July 8, 2017 at 15:50

      The question s/b, “why are SO FEW of us exceptions to that?

    • Realist
      July 9, 2017 at 00:44

      ” I do agree that the American populace are herd animals, but I ask myself constantly, why are some of us exceptions to that?”

      My take: Either a genetic mutation or early life trauma deranging what is considered normal social behavior. Anyone not a herd animal pays severe consequences.

      Discovering one’s parents and/or teachers repeatedly lie could construe such trauma. But one has to be astute enough to recognise this.

      • l kay
        July 9, 2017 at 22:16

        The Michael Eremia comment below suggests another theory, that some might search truth in pursuit of mental health. A diet of lies causes an uncomfortable cognitive dissonance, which some small percentage seek to remedy by pursuit of truth whereas a seeming majority have simply abdicated their role as citizens in response.
        The current regime both lacks the consent of the governed and rest on lies, such as that the US is a democracy when it is in fact been an illegitimate corrupt plutocracy since Buckley v Valeo legalized political payoffs.

  15. Mark Thomason
    July 8, 2017 at 12:58

    The US lied at the time in the UN to the Russians and Chinese, and then had to deal with real fury from them. That required denial. They’ve been in denial of their lies from the day they told them to get into Libya.

    The US press on these questions does not report. It is stenography of official press releases. They don’t even HAVE actual reporters. They just pick up the press releases. What passes for a reporter is at best someone dependent on insider sources for what are planted stories. Access journalism is not reporting. So there were no stories about the lies, just the cover story.

    • David Walters
      July 10, 2017 at 09:30

      Counter example, Seymour Myron “Sy” Hersh.

  16. Patricia Victour
    July 8, 2017 at 11:50

    People may be interested in reading, for background, “Slouching Towards Sirte: NATO’s War on Libya and Africa,” by Maximilian Forte.

    • Gregory Herr
      July 8, 2017 at 14:11

      Good recommendation. Another book of interest: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B008SWZJQW/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1

      from a review:
      “The attack on Libya was a gross act of unprovoked aggression led by the U.S. in the guise of N.A.T.O. this book does an excellent job of detailing why Libya was attacked as to why this attack took place part of the answer can be found in the middle of page 92-94 “His (Muammar Qaddafi) crowning achievement would have been the creation of the United States of Africa. His ultimate objective was forming a United States of Africa with its own currency, a standing pan-African military force, and a single passport. The supranational entity would have been created through the African Investment Bank. These institutions were all viewed with animosity by the European Union, United States, International Monetary Fund (IMF), and World Bank. Inside Libya, Qaddafi had a wealth redistribution project for his own citizens. U.S. Congressional sources acknowledge this.”

  17. andon
    July 8, 2017 at 11:40

    the previous administration is responsible for the “Arab Spring” in which the govts of Egypt, Tunisia, Libya and almost Syria were overthrown. They are also responsible for the overthrow of the Ukrainian govt, having spent $5 billion doing and so and yet so far there are no consequences for any of these criminals.

    July 8, 2017 at 11:29

    Hillary Clinton, IMHO, is one of US greatest political figures,and without a doubt most powerful female figure in the world.
    While despicable in many a mind that has ethical, rational and moral basis in their own personal beliefs, it is not she who should be looked upon in disdain, but those of her to the point of being rabid supporters.
    There will always be those within organizations who use the system to raise themselves above others within those groupings.
    That Hillary being a female, which she exploited to the max, could put in place the predominately white male and heavily mysoginist political leadership, was astounding, what is futher astounding is the immense wealth she helped accumulate for her familys Clinton Trust; no other U.S. political figure can match.
    Yet the millions of both male and female supporters and those of opposition kept her in power because they also gained by her noteriety and undisguised abuse of power.
    The american populace are herd animals and they let themselves be herded.
    Lots of political philosophers names bandied about but one we selldow find mentioned is the Jewish Philosopher Leo Strause, and one philosophy proven most relevent to US politic by Hillary Clinton.
    And while she may not of been an elected President she not Bill was the defacto President for his bumbling 8 years.
    Despise her, but realy despise those who allowed her to reach world wide status, for no matter her complete lack of any trace of elevated love of humanity, she still demands $500k USD for speech.
    After all it is we, the voting public, who are supposed to govern ourselves, and by our choices for Presidents since Trick Dick up to todays Trump we got what we wanted.

    • l kay
      July 9, 2017 at 22:24

      Voters do not “get what we wanted.” Read Gilens. Since Buckley v Valeo, no matter who we vote for we get what the plutocracy pays for. On narrow identity politics issues that do not concern plutocrats the people might be heard, but even there is it is often plutocratic money that drives the agenda.
      The Clintons’ political careers are defined by their boldness in operating within this corrupt system. This makes them the most corrupt politicians not the most powerful. The power resides with the plutocrats who pay them to prevent progressives from being elected even if they are the most popular with the public. The Clintons therefore gave us Trump, not the voting public who were given an unpalatable choice.

  19. exiled off mainstreet
    July 8, 2017 at 09:43

    War crimes and covering them up seems to be job one of yankee mainstream news organizations. The war crimes could not occur nearly as often without the national propaganda apparatus standing Goebbels-like behind the regime.

  20. Jay
    July 8, 2017 at 09:23

    “Invasion” is a bit of a stretch. (Yes, I know that the US and French both put commandos on the ground in Libya in 2011–likely to direct missiles, and smart bombs.)

    So it’s best to avoid saying an “invasion” occurred, it’s a kind of made up history. Plenty of fantastical lies about Libya spewed from the Obama administration in 2011. (Plenty of lies about Libya in defense of Hillary 2015/16 too.) So no need to make up an invasion which didn’t occur. Right, the body of the essay is concerned with something else.

  21. JUAN44
    July 8, 2017 at 09:15

    I am in TOTAL agreement with Mr. Lauria’s excellent analysis. As has been often said, the corporate MSM is nothing but a bulletin board for the FP “experts” in our imperial capital who continue to give the world these utter disasters. However, it should be pointed out that the NY Times in February last year ran a huge, front page, two part series on the Libya debacle and Hillary Clinton’s role in the destruction of a country. As far as I know there was little follow up on it and, as Mr. Lauria points out, little mention of the British Parliamentary report. While the series was a critical analysis of the catastrophe unleashed by the US, as is ALWAYS the case, they tended to write off this monumental disaster as a mere “mistake”. In addition, in spite of her obvious “mistake” that continues to resonate in the larger region and most especially in Europe, the Times never wavered in their support for Hillary as a brilliant statesman and future president.

  22. Baz
    July 8, 2017 at 07:09

    It must also be remembered that the much vaunted U.S. ‘doctrine of Responsibility to Protect’, which was used as an excuse for the attack on Libya, seemed to be missing in Bahrain!
    For almost at the same time in 2011, The King of Bahrain was brutally suppressing his majority Shiite population, including inviting Saudi military forces to help him do so! On the 14th March 2011 160 Saudi military vehicles entered Bahrain!

    Did the U.S. Government know about this? Of course they did.

    But then again, the U.S. does have a Naval base in Bahrain!

  23. Paranam Kid
    July 8, 2017 at 06:21

    Nothing has changed in the US foreign policy at least since WW2. And even the exposed lie about Saddam’s WMD did not change anything, as Libya proved, and as Syria is proving right now. The Trump regime decided on regime change in Syria a long time ago, and the Arab spring was a perfect excuse to get involved in the country, foment chaos, regime change, and a carve-up of the country.

    • andon
      July 8, 2017 at 12:06

      The Trump regime decided on regime change in Syria a long time ago

      how do you know that?

      • Realist
        July 8, 2017 at 14:53

        Shadows in the Deep State made that decision. They make all the decisions. It becomes pointless to ascribe policy to the “Clinton” regime, the “Bush” regime, the “Obama” regime or the “Trump” regime when the policy never changes in spite of campaign rhetoric or promises made. Bush was just obfuscating when he called himself the “decider.” Others made the decisions and he was the figurehead, just as Trump has recently been discovering his role.

      • Paranam Kid
        July 9, 2017 at 09:00

        When Trump took office he/Haley talked about regime change in Syria. Then, when it seemed that was no longer feasible, they let Assad “off the hook”. But immediately after the chemical attack last April, which they attributed to Assad the day after without ANY evidence to back that up, Assad was “back on the hook” & regime change was the order of the day, as Haley made clear in the UN. The chemical attack was just a very convenient excuse.

        It is likely that the US supported “rebels” did it because they wanted Assad back on the hook. Or the Deep State engineered the attack because the opportunity to get him out was too good to let him off for “good behaviour”.

        • andonnnn
          July 9, 2017 at 11:55

          its about an oil pipeline or a natural gas pipeline that some countries want to run thru Syria to Europe and Assad and the Russians dont want it to happen so other countries decided they have the right to overthrow Assad

          and if Syria is destroyed (((who else))) benefits?

  24. Burt
    July 8, 2017 at 05:57

    “Steve” (Stephen Kappes) wrote Gaddafi, thanking him for his “fine cooperation”

    Behind Gaddafi’s Diplomatic Turnaround
    By Scott MacLeod/Tripoli Thursday, May 18, 2006

    “I propose that our services take an additional step in cooperation with the establishment of a permanent CIA presence in Libya,” it says. It is signed by hand “Steve.”

    • Bob Van Noy
      July 8, 2017 at 11:34

      Really interesting links Burt. Thank you.

  25. Burt
    July 8, 2017 at 05:47

    Gaddafi gave up his wmd (loaded on a c17 and a large cargo ship and taken to the USA) and started working for Bush and Condi Rice in the early 2000s whom he affectionately called “Leeza”. He was a CIA agent who wrote Rice love letters and wrote her songs (“Black Rose of Africa”) His love letters stated that he loved “how the male leaders of Africa Cower before you (Rice),


    He came to own half the the Financial Times in London, His son owned a large mansion in the most expensive district in London.
    His assets were unfrozen and the lockerbie bomber was released and died at his home in libya.

    He operated a black site for CIA and MI6, torturing people and handing off the intelligence to his handlers.
    A document signed by “Steve” thanks Gaddafi for his cooperation and desire to open a permanent base in his country

    A handwritten letter from Tony Blair was found, revealing familiarity on a first name basis and the fact that Blair apologized for being late dropping of people for Gaddafi to torture

  26. ranney
    July 8, 2017 at 05:16

    Thank you Joe for a great article. I have been saddened by the Libya story ever since I read Diane Johnstone’s book “Queen of Chaos”. What we did was sickening. One of the things she reports is that over one million people in Libya went out in the streets in various cities to demonstrate FOR Gaddafi! When you consider that the population of Libya was about 5 or 6 million that is a huge proportion who took the time to go out and tell the world they wanted to keep him as their leader.

    As for the MSM eliminating all traces of our perfidy in Libya, I’m reminded of the more recent blackout of reliable reports about the so-called chemical strike by the Syrians that show that it wasn’t the Syrian army that did it. Seymore Hersh’s article was refused by major magazines and papers in the US and the UK, including the New Yorker where Hersh had been working. I’m disgusted with the New Yorker and will never read it again. Obviously they have drunk the coolaid and are now a propaganda outlet.

    • andonnnn
      July 9, 2017 at 11:52

      What we did was sickening

      lol, “We”????

      i dont take the blame for what others do and you shouldnt either. Put it right on the doorstep of the people who do these things – clinton, obongo, bush, etc. and who are they doing it on behalf of? who is getting rich? for example who benefits when Assad is overthrown? why would Qatar spend billions funding so called “syrian rebels” and why do all the (((newspapers))) cover for them???

  27. Realist
    July 8, 2017 at 03:14

    Hey, we Americans are always the good guys. We didn’t interfere in the elections of any of the countries we invaded to effect regime change or foment a coup. See, Clinton and Obama good, Putin bad. Trump bad because Putin controls his every thought, word and deed. You can read about it in all the papers. If you demand proof, you must be a commie. [Sarcasm]

  28. Brewer
    July 8, 2017 at 02:31

    Does anyone else find it remarkable that the U.S. has instigated regime change in three countries, Iraq, Libya and Syria, countries that provided what the U.S. government has been unable to provide to the American people – state funded Health and education?
    I find this article in the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists instructive:
    “Until the 1990s, Iraq had perhaps the best university system in the Middle East. Saddam Hussein’s regime used oil revenues to underwrite free tuition for Iraqi university students — churning out doctors, scientists, and engineers who joined the country’s burgeoning middle class and anchored development. Although political dissent was strictly off-limits, Iraqi universities were professional, secular institutions that were open to the West, and spaces where male and female, Sunni and Shia mingled. Also the schools pushed hard to educate women, who constituted 30 percent of Iraqi university faculties by 1991. (This is, incidentally, better than Princeton was doing as late as 2009.) With a reputation for excellence, Iraqi universities attracted many students from surrounding countries — the same countries that are now sheltering the thousands of Iraqi professors who have fled US-occupied Iraq…….
    ……In just 20 years, then, the Iraqi university system went from being among the best in the Middle East to one of the worst. This extraordinary act of institutional destruction was largely accomplished by American leaders who told us that the US invasion of Iraq would bring modernity, development, and women’s rights. Instead, as political scientist Mark Duffield has observed, it has partly de-modernized that country.”

    The inescapable conclusion is that the purpose of these interventions is to degrade whole societies and render them impotent. This is consistent with the now quite well known Israeli policy as laid out in the 1982 Oded Yinon plan and the 1996 “A clean break” strategy. It is worthy of note that the authors of the latter document were among the cheerleaders actively promoting the Iraq invasion.
    My only difficulty is in stretching my imagination so far as to contemplate such evil.

    • andon
      July 8, 2017 at 12:13

      they also instigated “regime change” in Tunisia and Ukraine.

      sounds like they need to be charged as international criminals

      also dont forget that most of the north african and middle east govts overthrown were somewhat secular and were replaced by extremist mooslims (as in Egypt before the people had had enough) – this was another goal of the revious US administration and as a result peaceful Christians all over the Middle East and North Africa have been slaughtered

    • RCW
      July 8, 2017 at 17:19

      Something I find remarkable is that of three countries you mentioned, and Georgia, Ukraine, Egypt, Algeria, et al, there’s been little or no coverage of the role the National Endowment for Democracy and its various related institutions, have played. The trees Reagan planted are starting to bear strange fruit.

  29. Susan Sunflower
    July 8, 2017 at 01:37

    I remember that there was such repetition of an impending massacre of 6,000 in Misrata for so long …. that I ended up being surprised that it had not already occurred (such was the repetition of this “future fact”) … Despite several months of battles (with guns and bullets and Goverment Air force support) I discovered the conflict death toll was, irrc, 34 (definitely under 50) … It was clear that the goverment response to this cradle of insurrection was NOT likely, obviously or inevitably MASSACRE …. a ruler has to live (and rule in the future if they survive) with the sequelae and legacy of their acts… see Saddam and his chemical massacre of the 5000 Kurds … oh wait, let’s find a better example (snark)

  30. Matthew Johnson
    July 7, 2017 at 23:40

    I always laugh when Democrats assert that Clinton only supported the Iraq war because she was tricked into doing so by Republican lies. Yet when it came to Libya she was the one telling the lies to trick the rest of the country into a disastrous war.

    • andon
      July 8, 2017 at 11:54

      yeah but she was just the Secretary of State and when the call came the guys in Benghazi needed help the person really in charge said “sorry fellas i’ve got Vegas in the morning and besides i’ve got to get back to my basketball on ESPN. Good luck”

  31. Slavica
    July 7, 2017 at 23:12

    Joe Lauria Keep up a great work. The truth will prevail sooner or latter in spite of Winston Smiths. Unfortunately, morality is for sale for many “journalists”.

  32. backwardsevolution
    July 7, 2017 at 22:18

    Joe Lauria – “One can only conclude that U.S. corporate media’s mission is not to tell all sides of an international story, or report news critical of U.S. foreign policy, but instead to push an agenda supporting U.S. interests abroad. That’s not journalism. That’s instead the job Winston Smith did.”

    Excellent reporting!

  33. Joe Tedesky
    July 7, 2017 at 21:52

    If I hadn’t read about the British parliament report here on consortiumnews, as Joe Lauria said, I wouldn’t have ever heard about it. Such events as this British one, are what make interacting with your family and friends believe that you have now become a full accredited conspiracy nut. They have no idea of what your talking about, because CNN or the NYT didn’t report anything on it….what British parliament report?

    Maybe somebody out there knows the particulars, but a little while after the fall of Libya, and Qahdafi’s brutal murder, I read somewhere where Qahdafi and his son were in diplomatic contact with Former Representative Dennis Kucinich, working with him on a deal to abdicate and exit the country. Then as suddenly, as I learned of this, that’s how instantly the story went away. Supposedly Kusinch worked his ass off trying to help the Qahdafi’s, but apparently the State Department wasn’t going for it. Then I heard no more.

    Regardless of any of that, this country needs a news media who is independent and detached from all or any special interest, or corporate control. Screw all the fantastic graphic designs, and fancy sets, just give me a news room with reporters to give me the straight and honest news. Tell me how the bad guys got bad. Tell me how much taxpayer money is being wasted each day we stay in Afghanistan. Condemn our allies for human rights abuses, and while at it tell me how our own country is doing in that field of humanitarian respect. Finally, just be a honest news media, that’s all I ask.

    Great article Joe Lauria, as usual. Joe

  34. mike k
    July 7, 2017 at 21:39

    The lying and arrogance of those in power is a long tradition, as are their efforts to conceal their crimes. They play a massive con game on the public, who they lead by the nose to be the victims of their scam, without a clue that they are being had by those who pretend to “serve” them.

  35. July 7, 2017 at 21:15

    That photo of Hillary Clinton — her face shows arrogance, self-righteousness, hardness, just plain meanness. Trump may be arrogant in his own way, but Hillary Clinton is outright cruel. I find myself more disgusted by her than by George W. Bush, maybe because she is so persistent in her evil.

    • exiled off mainstreet
      July 8, 2017 at 09:48

      I agree, that photo, and various other photos of her and her record, including her triumphant “we came, we saw, he died” video reveal her want of decency and fundamental evil.

  36. July 7, 2017 at 21:10

    Thank you Joe for a most eye opening story. Completely consistent with everything else I read these days and dig two inches down into the facts of the matter. It is critical at this point in time for us to change many many narratives. This is a very good place to start. Again I say thank you!

  37. Cal
    July 7, 2017 at 19:51

    This funny in a sad way.

    ALL of US history is being re written—–and so few see the main cancer,,,,they are busy looking at the little tumors.

  38. Susan Sunflower
    July 7, 2017 at 19:27

    As will be true with Russia-gate, the Libya story became “all-about” Benghazi — at the mention of which, democrat would plug their ears and shriek about wasteful and redundant republican congressional hearings … nuf-said.

    It’s fascinating how that “narrative” or labeling as “fake news” (before its time) became a subtefuge to prevent any discussion … much as Iraq is reduced to “missing WMD” allowing the issue of “preemptive war” (which R2P was supposed to be its next-generation … as Libya was to echo the American/Nato faux-triumph in Bosnia) …

    It reminds me again of the evidence-free 09/11 truther movement and the endlessly dry well of Whitewater … The endless investigations into Benghazi that never got around to transfer of arms shipments to Syria (via Turkey) involving arms of unknown provenance (who’s got the title), transported by whom, for delivery to whom, etc. … even as we know that the mission of the CIA compound in Benghazi was to take possession of heavy weapons from “rebels” after the fall of Gadaffi (did we buy them off of jihadis or did we simply steal them?)

    The NATO intervention led to a death and deposing of Gadaffi, which freed the mobile jihadi army of Northern Africa to swiftly re-deploy to Syria … “double-blessings” …

    There were suspicions — almost immediately — that USA/NATO intended on repeating / recreating Bosnia/Libya R2P in Syria .. only the stink of Benghazi (it’s not nice to lie to the public) rand the escalating chaos in Libya prevented another Neocon “perfect intervention” (regime change) in Syria

    • Susan Sunflower
      July 7, 2017 at 20:25

      It’s peculiar how the “truther movement” became ‘all-about” building 7 when there were so many unanswered questions … it also made further inquiry “oddly” “paradoxically” less likely … much more easy to dismiss as conspiracy theory, fantacists …

      I see it also in the “vast right wing conspiracy” that preempts any discussion or serious consideration of anything having to do with the Clintons … how very convenient … wink wink nudge nudge say no more, say no more. …
      Americans “know” that Assad and Putin are “very bad men” as they knew that Gadaffi and Saddam Hussain were “bad men” as they knew that Milosevic was a “bad man” … all much too frequently compared to the exemplar of Adolph Hitler and increasingly Joseph Stalin … who’s next?

    • andon
      July 8, 2017 at 11:50

      sounds like a lot of crooks from the previous administration need to go to jail and the (((media))) covered for them

      • susan sunflower
        July 8, 2017 at 23:16

        The lack of outrage at GWB’s administrations failure to cooperate / stonewalling (“national security” doncha know) with the commission still amazes me … funny how those “redacted Saudi related page” failed to “change everything” …

        Mystification is a powerful distraction tool … I’ve been noticing the anemic coverage of “migrants” … recently and at the G20 … The USA and Britain love to shake fingers and scold and contribute NOTHING … but more warmongering.

  39. Zachary Smith
    July 7, 2017 at 18:45

    One can only conclude that U.S. corporate media’s mission is not to tell all sides of an international story, or report news critical of U.S. foreign policy, but instead to push an agenda supporting U.S. interests abroad.

    I’m sorry, but there is at least one other conclusion a person can draw regarding the activities of the Neocon Newspapers.

    They’re operated by people who routinely lie and manipulate news stories about every issue which they regard as important for a certain little middle east nation. Consider this piece I found just before coming to the current essay:

    “After 1,379 Days, NYT Corrects Bogus Claim Iran ‘Sponsored’ 9/11”

    Recall that the filthy rags were the greatest cheerleaders for the attack on Iraq culminating in the destruction of that nation. The people at the NYT and WP are well-paid pond scum, and lying for the interests of Israel is as routine for them as taking their next breath.


    • andon
      July 8, 2017 at 11:49

      lol, someone figured it out. instead of blaming the avg American for what the (((TV networks))) or (((US newspapers))) say or for what the (((neocons))) that run foreign policy do. rest assured a “cohen” wasnt going to spill the beans

  40. Eduardo Cohen
    July 7, 2017 at 18:41

    What was also never mentioned in the US news media was that Libyans enjoyed the highest quality of life in all of Africa. Libyan citizens enjoyed free universal health care from prenatal to geriatric, free education from elementary school to post-graduate studies and free or subsidized housing. We were told that Gaddafi ripped off the nation’s oil wealth for himself when in reality Libya’s oil wealth was used to improve the quality of life for all Libyans. We were told that Libya had to be rebuilt from scratch because Gaddafi had not allowed the development of national institutions. If we knew that infant mortality had been seriously reduced, life expectancy increased and health care and education made available to everyone, we might have asked, “How could all that be accomplished without the existence of national institutions?” Knowledge is the antidote to propaganda and brainwashing which is exactly why it is being increasingly controlled and restricted.

    • backwardsevolution
      July 7, 2017 at 20:25

      Eduardo Cohen – good post. Gaddafi also built a 1,500 mile pipeline from southern Libya to the north in order to provide his citizens with good, clean water. He also gave every married couple $50,000.00 (which they had to eventually pay back, without interest). If you couldn’t get the higher education you required in Libya, the government helped you to go elsewhere. Gaddafi had to be tough to keep the various tribes in line, but he did provide for his people. I was furious the day he was murdered. It was a travesty. I’m sure he wasn’t a perfect person, but he did do a lot of good for his people.

      • Peter Smith
        July 8, 2017 at 02:45

        He also had big plans for the rest of the African continent to help the nations there to get out from their misery by using the Lybian model of prosperity…..

        • Gregory Herr
          July 8, 2017 at 19:10


          And Libya provided a good example of how aspects of direct democracy can be implemented.

          But we can’t have those examples hanging around (like in Central and South America)…it gives people “ideas”.

        • susan sunflower
          July 8, 2017 at 23:13

          yes, gadaffi hoped to create a northern african, possibly pan-african “united states” or african-union … can’t have that … see also Saddam … and Assad … quite seriously, there’s nothing subtle about American “intervention” to thwart other nations’ “self-determination”

    • jo6pac
      July 7, 2017 at 20:29

      Yes they were also given money on marriage and more money on birth of a child paid by the country you were given home or an apartment that the citizens now owned.

      This very un-American.

      Then there was that little thing of him setting up a bank for Africa not using Dollars. That was very ungrateful on him;-)

      Then amazing enough his son could be running the country by years end and Amerika will do everything to stop it but I don’t think they can.

      • andon
        July 8, 2017 at 11:46

        “Yes they were also given money on marriage and more money on birth of a child paid by the country you were given home or an apartment that the citizens now owned.

        This very un-American.”

        you’re right Americans beileve in earning it

        • Salamander
          July 8, 2017 at 21:19

          Really? Do Alaskans not get an oil dividend from the their state’s natural resources? Perhaps Americans don’t think so differently after all.

        • akech
          July 8, 2017 at 21:56

          Yeah right: (a) saddling ambitious youths from predominantly poor and middle class families with predatory college loans (b) dishing out thousands of H1-B visas to low pay foreign educated workers to suppress wages in America (c) negotiating trade deals, like TPP, to further outsource jobs abroad (c) dishing out billions $$$ bailouts to Wall Street to thank them from crashing the US in 2008 (d) failing to either bailout student loaded with college debts or lower the high interest rates attached to these debts!!!

          Can these activities be labeled as “EARNING IT” or merely creating permanent the underclasses crippled with debts? American ruling elites are hellbent on creating of societies around the world in which 99.9% of citizens are crippled with massive debts.

          These debts are being attached to these countries’ natural and infrastructure resources.
          These may be some of the motives behind the regime change policies; the demolition of countries infrastructures!!

    • July 7, 2017 at 21:16

      Great comment, thank you. I also recommend Nelson DeMille’s book The Lions Game. Fiction, but incredibly accurate in portraying how a terrorist is developed. In this case directly from our bombing of Libya.

    • T
      July 8, 2017 at 09:35

      > Libyan citizens enjoyed free universal health care from prenatal to geriatric,

      – Not just citizens, but other people living in the country, as well.

      – Even veterinary care was free.

  41. a Private I
    July 7, 2017 at 18:30

    Gold, Oil, and Narcotic Drugs are worth endless Wars. Ask Bill or Hillary Clinton why.

    July 7, 2017 at 18:24

    Why no mention of Bush placing secrecy blanket over past media of all types, that retroactively went back vlear to before Daddys rule?
    I had newscopy video tapes in archives of those years almost all of which had appeared on public open sources, including originals of his bs on carrier with war over banner in background.
    That pic became almost as extinct as a white rino, and
    nowhere in any arvhives of main stream was there found
    any but ones with banner nonexistent.
    Future historian researchers of 1960- today will find nothing but the original main stream propaganda not the truth.
    Let us not forget Clintonistas of Bill who applauded and pushed current news from out of nation no matter the wire service into a mandatory review and delay before min domestic media could report upon it.
    Also nowhere today can be found in archives of the current at the time support by news orgs staffs for Vietnam
    Sic. War; Many who later came out in opposition as populace did, but not before.
    It is said: To the victors comes the right to rewrite history” in US case those today are using rewritten history for even more non reality.
    My checking of their arvhives found no retractions on what were blatant printed lines, even when many mon poeerfull people and

    • doray
      July 10, 2017 at 10:35

      HB, the entire US is based on lies, the first being, “All men are created equal.” That’s the biggest lie of all, and the one still doing the most harm. Slaughtering innocents at home around the globe in the name of religious righteousness has been Amerika’s forte since its inception. I first realized that as a teenager in church when we prayed for the men and boys going to kill people in Vietnam because their government sucked. Millions of Christians prayed to God to keep their soldiers safe as they took part in the slaughter of three and a half million people. I grew up singing about Jesus loving all the little children of the world, and here were loving men in my church slaughtering those children of the world! The government stole our young men from their homes and forced them to shoot, maim, spray tons of hideous herbicides, and bomb the crap out of innocent babies, children, women, and men. Many of those very boys walk the streets of America today, as old men scarred for life by what their criminal government made them do. The government looks at them with disdain.
      America has always been a big fat lie.

  43. July 7, 2017 at 18:08

    I wrote the article below (link below) about what was happening in Libya.
    October 30, 2011
    “The War Criminals Who Bombed Libya”
    By Stephen J. Gray

    • Bob Van Noy
      July 7, 2017 at 20:14

      Stephen J, l always look at your links and often thank you for your obvious dedication, and you were correct in 2011 when you saw right through the obfuscation. Congratulations…

      • July 7, 2017 at 22:03

        Thanks Bob Van Noy I truly believe we are in the hands of a controlling evil. If we had a functioning justice system I believe war crimes trials would be instigated.
        Cheers Stephen

    • john wilson
      July 8, 2017 at 04:38

      War criminals is the right word to use, Spephen J, and we had two of the worst over here in the UK. These were David Cameron and fool William Hague (foreign secretary), who after the hideous murder of Gadaffi and butchery of thousands of men, women and children, went on a march of triumph and glory to Libya. They were both wreathed is smiles as they shook hands with the terrorists there. This was every bit as horrifying as seeing that ghastly old boot Clinton, clapping her hands and laughing like some old witch when she heard of the vile murder of Gadaffi. All of them are like Bush and Blair before them: stinking callous murderous war criminals who should be hanged on a noose made from barbed wire.

      • andon
        July 8, 2017 at 11:44

        cameron is also responsible for flooding his own country with foreigners in order to improve his party’s future chances

        sounds like he may be guilty of treason

      • Antonia
        July 8, 2017 at 12:09

        A friend of mine heard and believed everything BBC Radio 4 reported. I told him he was a fool and would regret Gadaffi’s murder.
        A colleague of mine had lent me two books issued by Gadaffi’s Government one was the His little green book and the second was what passed as history. The latter was quite fascinating!
        For anyone who is interested in Libya before the advent of Gadaffi especially about Benghazi and its region. There is book by a Gwen William’s entitled”Green Mountain”.

        • Bob Van Noy
          July 10, 2017 at 09:31

          Great and informative thread. Thank you and stay engaged. We’re All learning here!

    • doray
      July 10, 2017 at 10:03

      Your article mirrors my daily feelings about the war criminals in charge of the nation. My family thinks I’m crazy, but I will not ignore these crimes against humanity this nation commits every damned day. Silence is consent in my book. If I don’t speak out against our nation’s atrocities, my complicity makes me an accessory. It’s one of my main, “We the People” responsibilities. Thanks for your work, Stephen J. Gray.

  44. July 7, 2017 at 17:44

    A welcome analysis…I confess, I too, was duped by the MSM propaganda at that time.

    • Procopius
      July 10, 2017 at 09:18

      There were stories published about the decisions being pushed in Washington, including many stories explaining why the Washington justifications were wrong and predicting the disaster which has followed. Of course they never got any traction in the major press outlets but I read them and so did many other people. Even the fact that Qaddafi had taken towns without any civilian casualties was reported, but of course that was contrary to what the State Department wanted.

  45. Sally Snyder
    July 7, 2017 at 17:37

    Here is an email from Hillary Clinton’s private server about the situation in Libya prior to the unseating of Muammar Qaddafi


    It is obvious that Ms. Clinton’s attempts to rebuild a democratic Libyan state have been a complete failure.

    • Eduardo Cohen
      July 7, 2017 at 18:28

      Building a democratic state has never been a US motive in their foreign, military and covert policies in the Middle East and North Africa (and most of the rest of the world actually). In fact History shows us that wherever real democracy develops around the globe, the US government will attempt to stomp it out. That is unless that nation elects someone Washington approves of.

      • Rob Roy
        July 8, 2017 at 04:24

        Eduardo Cohen, absolutely true. Could not have said it better.

      • andon
        July 8, 2017 at 11:42

        gee, when all these middle east countries are attacked over and over again, i wonder (((who))) benefits eduardo?

        could it be “our greatest ally”?

        is America’s foreign policy run by a (((certain group of people)))??

        • July 8, 2017 at 17:59

          Yes, of course but we dare not mention the word Israel for fear of being branded anti-Semetic. Such is the brainwashing of the American populace. Thankfully there are more and more people seeing through to truth, thanks andon for being one of these enlightened folk.

          • Procopius
            July 10, 2017 at 09:09

            This is a problem, and it gives coverage to people like Rahm Emanuel who is powerful in the Democratic party. You cannot mention that he served in the Israel Defense Force or that he holds dual US-Israeli citizenship as possibly part of his motivations. Granted it is not often relevant, but even when it is it is unmentionable. Nor is it polite to mention that Sheldon Adelson, who surely must be a ruthless murderer to have achieved his billions, is an orthodox Jew who spends tens of millions (chump change, to him) every election cycle to get other crooks elected because they will give more benefits to Israel. I really don’t think there is an international conspiracy of Jewish bankers, but there certainly is an Israeli Mafia comparable to Cosa Nostra and the Black Hand and the network of Russian oligarchs.

      • l kay
        July 9, 2017 at 22:42

        Never say “never.” At different periods of US history US history has favored democracy and non-intervention. The big change came with Woodrow Wilson who had been an academic propagandist for Jim Crow before he lied for foreign intervention, in places like revolutionary Russia. The Dulles Bros. trained under Wilson and credited him when the revived his politicies under Eisenhower in the name of anti-communism. Guatemala. Iran. the Congo and other internventions followed. Even then, after the 60’s revolt correctly rejected anti-communism as more dangerous to democracy than communism there was room for the Carter presidency which claims to have not lost a single American in a war. Though Carter’s foreign policy and Brzenski’s role, can be debated, an argument can be made that it leaned toward democracy.
        It is only since the US democracy was overthrown by plutocrats after Buckley v Valeo (1976) that the systemically corrupt and hence illegitimate US government has become thoroughly anti-democratic at home and abroad. To say “never” encompasses to much of US history to be accurate. The truth is that the US has had democratic eras and anti-democratic eras throughout its history. It is currently deep into a profoundly plutocratic era so your statement is accurate for the current era, but not all eras.

      • Joy
        July 10, 2017 at 11:44


    • July 9, 2017 at 11:23

      This was all done during the administration of Obama. Are we to believe that these are the foreign policy goals of the American people? When did we tell Obama to take over Syria? I must have missed that memo. How did Obama assemble all the people and resources he would need to accomplish this? Personally, I don’t think Obama is that clever. We think too much of him.

      • Procopius
        July 10, 2017 at 09:14

        I noticed under Obama that sometimes he would make foreign policy decisions that I thought were correct and in line with America’s long term interests, and then within a few days he would make some announcement that followed the neoconservatives’ strategy. Very disconcerting. It was as though occasionally his minders’ attention would wander and he would do what he wanted, and they would notice and crack down on him again. I thought we were in trouble when his choice of adviser on foreign policy was the torture apoligist John Brennan.

Comments are closed.