David Craig, on October 10th, 2015I hope all readers have had the chance to view the interview with General Wesley Clark that I posted yesterday. If he is to be believed, the US and its glove puppet (the UK) would have overthrown the governments of the main Arab states whether 9/11 had happened or not. In fact, 9/11 and the subsequent invasion of Afghanistan were actually unwelcome distractions from the main policy of replacing the regimes of Iraq, Syria, Libya and other countries with US-friendly alternatives.
In the light of General Wesley Clark’s revelations, I’d like to repeat a blog I wrote a few months ago suggesting that we were lied to over Libya, in just the same way as we were lied to over Iraq and Saddam’s mysterious WMDs. �Here it is:
We now know that Blair lied and lied and lied and lied to get us involved in the overthrow of the nasty dictator Saddam Hussein who supposedly had WMDs. And our propagandist media kept telling us that “nothing could be worse than Saddam”. We now know better.
Then came Syria. We were told that Bashar Al Assad was a thoroughly nasty dictator who had used chemical weapons and therefore we should help overthrow him. After all, our rulers and their tame media informed us “nothing could be worse than Assad”. We now know better.
After that came Libya. We were told that Qaddafi was a thoroughly nasty dictator and therefore we should help overthrow him.�After all, our rulers and their tame media informed us “nothing could be worse than Qaddafi”. We now know better.
Is there anyone else who can see a pattern here?
There’s a recent article in the highly respected Foreign Affairs magazine suggesting that we were lied to over Libya in just the same was as we were lied to over Iraq and Syria.
Here’s a brief extract:
“Moreover, by the time NATO intervened, Libya�s violence was on the verge of ending. Qaddafi�s well-armed forces had routed the ragtag rebels, who were retreating home. By mid-March 2011, government forces were poised to recapture the last rebel stronghold of Benghazi, thereby ending the one-month conflict at a total cost of just over 1,000 lives. Just then, however, Libyan expatriates in Switzerland affiliated with the rebels issued warnings of an impending �bloodbath� in Benghazi, which Western media duly reported but which in retrospect appear to have been propaganda.
In reality, on March 17, Qaddafi pledged to protect the civilians of Benghazi, as he had those of other recaptured cities, adding that his forces had �left the way open� for the rebels to retreat to Egypt. Simply put, the militants were about to lose the war, and so their overseas agents raised the specter of genocide to attract a NATO intervention�which worked like a charm. There is no evidence or reason to believe that Qaddafi had planned or intended to perpetrate a killing campaign.
The full article is here:
https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/libya/2015-02-16/obamas-libya-debacle
If the article is accurate, it makes chilling reading in the way it exposes the lies and incompetence of our leaders and their supinely obedient, propagandist press.
The dictators in Iraq, Syria and Libya may not have been the kind of people you would invite home to meet your mother. But they did keep their ungovernable countries under control. By removing them we have created utter chaos and appalling suffering. And as this chaos spreads to Europe, we will be the people to suffer from our rulers’ mistakes and lies.
Category: 
Before his overthrow by NATO, Muammar Gaddafi had an agreement with Italy, which is directly to Libya�s north, across the Mediterranean Sea. Gaddafi agreed to prevent refugees heading for Europe from using Libya as a transit point. It was an arrangement that worked. So it�s no shocker that when NATO helped a coalition of ambitious rebels overthrow the Gaddafi government, the refugee floodgates opened.
When there�s war, there are refugees. It�s a predictable outcome.
It�s like kicking a bees� nest and being surprised that bees fly out. Nobody should be surprised when that happens. And nobody should be surprised that people are fleeing war zones in Libya, Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan.
If Western governments didn�t want a refugee crisis, they shouldn�t have been so eager to topple those governments and destabilize those countries. The refugees should camp out in the backyards of the individuals who run those governments.
http://www.internationalman.com/articles/the-real-reason-for-the-refugee-crisis-you-wont-hear-about-in-the-media
But who made all that lying possible? The media with the BBC front and centre. They lost the habit of trusting the British people with the truth decades ago. There’s a great satire on their “balance” at: http://john-moloney.blogspot.com/2015/10/the-bbc-is-balanced.html
They set out to fragment Iraq, Libya and Syria. If they wanted to stop the flow of migrants which is against the wishes of the majority they could . They do not want to it is plan for evil to fragment our own countries, When the debt bomb detonates we will have civil strife bordering on civil war. Than they will take emergency powers to restore order.
Comment from a reader: A fundamental driver of our disastrous interventions in the countries you list is the idea that all people are the same and that if we remove one bad man then the remaining population will gratefully return to peace and prosperity. The very same ‘Bad Man’ explanation of WW2 is constantly heard despite its palpable absurdity. Before any propaganda and brainwashing, Germans had the option to call Hitler and his ilk losers and tell them to get lost, but his views found receptive minds for a complex variety of reasons.
Aha you may say, the WW2 case can be explained by hyper-inflation, economic depression and crippling war reparations but that none of this applies to modern dictatorships. Furthermore Hitler won an election!
What I think may tie these cases together is the fascinating study of epi-genetics, which concerns the expression or non-expression of genes, depending upon the environment. It is in its early stages and far from proven but it seems to show that such disparate factors as food restriction, child abuse, religion, female equality and sexual freedom will predispose a society to be peaceful or brutal, democratic or tyrannical, insular or empire building and stable or unstable.
In short, it may very well be that some countries really are unsuited to democracy; furthermore this is neither genetic nor racist nor insulting but a biological response to the environment.
Mr. Craig, your last sentence makes a lot of sense. Islamic countries seem to be
fairly stable when a strong man is in power,or stable with royal sheikdoms.
Where democracy has been tried it usually ends with military intervention.
John Fields, I remember 10 years ago someone told me that, Iraq was stable under Saddam Hussein because a minority party/sect was in power and maintained the balance of power between the rulers and the ruled effectively and reasonably balanced enough for the country to be relatively stable for the majority of people unlike today and for the future it seems. Admittedly Saddam was far,far from perfect. But you see the biggest folly and mistake of Western leaders led by Obameron is that they see everything as right or wrong, black or white. Nothing has ever been so clear cut and never will be ,only to pen pushers in Washington and 10 Downing Street that have never possessed a real job(or heard real bullets pass their ears in the true heat of battle like Royal Marine Alexander Blackman who has been betrayed by his own pen pushing judges for doing their bidding, he should be judge by his military peers only, those that have tasted really war themselves) and never will and have never lived nor never ever will live in the real world, a serious defect for which we will all pay dearly.As witnessed by the abject ,less than amateur handling of the migrant/refugee crisis of their own making that we again are going to pay the price for.Folly upon folly and yet we tolerate these people, nay have misplaced respect, well not me never and yet by too many it seems to upset the perpetuation of future folly guaranteed.