Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
April 06, 2019

Libya - From Ghaddafi To Hafter

Libya is back in the news as the so called Libyan National Army under General Hafter is moving to attack Tripoli. How did we get here?

In March 2011 the United Kindom, France and the U.S. set out to destroy the government of Libya. Muslim Brotherhood militia and al-Qaeda aligned forces, equipped by Qatar and supported by Britain, took the easten city of Benghazi. The U.S. airforce destroyed government troops on the ground and helped the militants to capture and murder Muhammar Ghaddafi. Chaos ensued as various tribal forces, local militia and Islamists fought over control of the cities and the spoils.

One person who tried to insert himself into the chaos as new leader of Libya was the former general Khalifa Haftar. He had taken part in the coup that brought Ghaddafi to power but later fell out with him and changed sides. The CIA sponsored him to launch a coup against Ghaddafi. The coup failed and since 1990 Hafter has lived in Virginia where he also became a U.S. citizen.

Haftar's attempt to take power amongst the chaos of 2011 failed. The Muslim Brotherhood aligned militia saw him as a secular Ghaddafi follower and rejected him. The situation changed in 2014 after the military in Egypt ousted the Muslim Brotherhood aligned president Morsi from power. Egypt, under the new president Sisi, feared the Islamist gangs in Libya and wanted to eliminate them. Hafter was called upon to build an army and to take over Benghazi. The United Arab Emirates financed the project. With UAE money, Egyptian air support, Russian supplies, French intelligence and special forces support Hafter slowly defeated the various Islamist gangs and took control over Benghazi.

It took him more than three years to consolidate his control and to build up his Libyan National Army (LNA) that would allow him to take the western parts of Libya.

Those western parts, including the capital Tripoli, are controlled by various feuding familes, clans and tribes, each with their own militia. There is also a nominal Government of National Accord under Fayez al-Sarraj. It is recognized by the UN but has no forces of its own. It depends on the support of local militia in Tripoli and support coming from the coastal city of Misrata. That city has a strong tribal militia which even operates a small air force.

Libya - January 1 2019


Misrata is also what blocked Hafter from moving his troops from Benghazi in the east along the coast towards Tripoli in the west. The blocking force made it necessary for Hafter to move through the thinly populated south and then west and again north towards Tripoli. An attempt to do so in 2018 failed when local forces in the southwest (pink), supported by Algeria's military, resisted Haftar's move.

This year Algeria has its own problems as mass protests forced its president Abdelaziz Bouteflika to step down. The Algerian military is busy at home with installing a new ruler. Hafter, with the help of UAE money, bought off the southwestern forces and thereby opened the roads towards Tripoli. He also took control of Sirte in the north and the El Sharara oil fields near Wasi al Hayaa in the south. The field produces some 300,000 barrels of oil per day which can be exported through Sirte's ports. Control of these assets gave Haftar a huge power boost.

Libya - April 6 2019


Haftar's LNA is now some 20 miles from Tripoli but resistance from local militia and from forces sent from Misrata is building up. Yesterday Haftar's military briefly took the defunct international airport of Tripoli but was soon ousted. Today fighter jets launched from Misrata attacked his forces.

Tripoli - April 6 2019


If Hafter wants to succeed he will have to take the road between Tripoli and Misrata to split his enemies. He could then take Tripoli and announce his own national government. There are rumors that some of the warlords in Tripoli are willing to change sides and to join Haftar.

Hafter has open support from France, the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Russia. The Trump administration is not interested to step into the mess. Hafter is an old CIA asset and if he takes control there is a good chance that the U.S. will have influence over him. As long as Libyan oil flows and keeps the global oil price down Trump will be happy. Russia is trying to stay in the background to not give the anti-Russian forces in Washington an excuse to intervene.

The Muslim Brothers, supported by Turkey and Qatar, are still in play in Misrata but have otherwise lost their influence on the ground.

Hafter and his troops seem to have nearly all advantages on their side. Their supply route from Benghazi through the south towards Tripoli is too long, but France is helping to protect it by keeping rebels from Chad and Mali in Libya's south under control. The Egyptian air force may well help again and destroy whatever planes Misrata has left.

But war is unpredictable and militia in Libya have often changed sides on a moment's notice. It may take 10 days to take Tripoli without many casualties or 100 days of intense fighting. The attempt could even fail.

Libya is a divers tribal country that is unlikely to function as a democracy. A strongman like Muhammad Ghaddafi can control it by distributing the income from its mineral resources and by keeping the Islamists down. Hafter may be able to replicate that.

But he is 75 years old. A year ago he was evacuated to France for some medical emergency procedures. His sons, two of which lead some of his militia, are of unknown quality. Another problem is brewing in Benghazi where Wahabbi preachers, trained in Saudi Arabia, replaced Muslim Bortherhood preachers and now introduce Saudi style rule over women and local culture.

A strongman ruling all of Libya from Tripoli is certainly better for Libya and its people than the long chaos that ensued after the war the U.S., Britain and France waged against the country. Given some time Hafter may well achieve that. But he is not a longterm solution. The best one can hope for is that he wins enough time for Libya to come back to its senses and for the civil war to die down. 

Posted by b on April 6, 2019 at 18:26 UTC | Permalink


thanks b for this overview... what did all the outside players, usa-britian and etc. etc. get in the ensuing chaos on the ground? i realize uae-ksa want to install the whackjob wahabbi cult, but what does the west get out of the chaos? is this another example of disaster capitalism at it's finest?

Posted by: james | Apr 6 2019 18:36 utc | 1

What happened to Italy in this Libya fight?

I thought they were backing a faction that opposed the French?

Did Italy and France come to an agreement?

Posted by: Johnny Law | Apr 6 2019 18:36 utc | 2

Since the open thread is 3 pages and way back and there is no other, I am posting here a live feed to the Jewish Republican Coalition. This is required viewing for anyone who still thinks of America as independent and Democratic and not Israeli occupied territory. 2 people got a standing O when they entered: Adelson and Trump. If there are ANY doubts Trump is Zionist and Neocon watch and listen to Trump prove who he really is.

Posted by: Circe | Apr 6 2019 19:00 utc | 3

Libya is the billboard poster child of out of control Western Corpgov. Completely unnecessary. Totally evil.

Western Corpgov today takes what it wants,,, In Iraq and Ukraine the West simply robbed the gold and cash,,, especially Libya's. ( and WTC? ) Likewise in Afghanistan the poppy crops are protected.

Iran is no threat except to Israel which controls the US government. In Venezuela it's oil and minerals. Rumor has it the US is opening a base in Lebanon under the guise of thwarting Hisbollah. Israel likely behind this as it would very much like access to the plentiful fresh water in Lebanon.

Corporations that now control Western governments are out to rob anything of value they can lay their hands on,,, which explains Russia, North Korea and Africa.

Posted by: ken | Apr 6 2019 19:23 utc | 4

The western powers want to control the price of oil.

Posted by: Lbanu | Apr 6 2019 19:35 utc | 5

@ james with the question about what the players got out of trashing Libya.

ken at #4 has a good rant but more to the point for me was the precipitation of the murder of Ghaddafi for spreading the wealth of the country...socialism.....not allowed. And Ghaddafi was going to sell oil in other than US dollars....not allowed.

Then the players could come along and rape to protect Libya from socialism by stealing all the gold and such so none else could try such an affront to the God of Mammon/private finance way

Posted by: psychohistorian | Apr 6 2019 19:38 utc | 6

Ah yes a Libya sitrep, txs b. I suggest twitter account @GeromanAT for current map updates. I also suggest Circe to f--k off with her unrelated crap..

Posted by: Lozion | Apr 6 2019 19:45 utc | 7

@7 L

Don't let me point out all your unrelated crap on other threads; I'll never finish. The nerve I obviously hit is that I point out Trump's obsequiousness with Zionists and Neocons. I think it's very relevant that Trump is in with the scum that is inflicting chaos and regime change. Trump has done squat to reverse that effort. He just moved on to Iran and Venezuela that's all, because the other shet was mostly taken care of previously. Why is he meddling in Venezuela? Why is he after Iran? Never mind, don't answer that. I'm not interested in you Trump whitewash lather.

Posted by: Circe | Apr 6 2019 20:33 utc | 8

"El Sharara oil fields near Wasi al Hayaa in the south. The field produces some 300,000 barrels of oil per day which can be exported through Sirte's ports."

Repsol worldwide's website puts production at 37,200 bpd. 300,000 bpd is a shitload - the entirety of Libya produces 1,003,000 bpd. I know it says 300,000 bpd on wiki but I think repsol's figure is probably more accurate.

Posted by: Kaiama | Apr 6 2019 20:36 utc | 9

Trump taps pro-Ukraine, pro-Georgia Russophobe, Richard Norland, as next Ambassador to Libya. Let's be clear, the U.S. and Russia are not and will never be on the same page regarding Libya or any other country in the ME U.S. meddles in.

trump taps Norland

Posted by: Circe | Apr 6 2019 20:55 utc | 10

Hoping that the assembled barflies can stomach another OT (but, I believe, extremely timely and important) matter . . .

US moves to cut off Venezuela oil, Cuba trade

US vows to prevent Venezuelan oil shipments to Cuba, an act of war.

I read about the first 20 comments to the article – 100 percent negative

Posted by: AntiSpin | Apr 6 2019 20:59 utc | 11

If Hafter is a CIA asset and has the support Of UAE and Saudi Arabia then he is NO GOOD. PERIOD!

Posted by: Circe | Apr 6 2019 21:09 utc | 12


I wonder what Lozion will say?🙃 AWWH F..K HIM!

So Trump is anti-war and foreign intervention, huh?

This is the REAL Donald Trump! You know what this move represents don't you? It's the Trump finger to Russian troops in Venezuela.

Posted by: Circe | Apr 6 2019 21:19 utc | 13

Sigh, and to think I was trying to prevent thread derailing. My bad.
Apologies to the commentariat, except of course to our resident polluter in chief..

Posted by: Lozion | Apr 6 2019 21:39 utc | 14

Thank you b,
there is a related link at:

Posted by: frances | Apr 6 2019 21:49 utc | 15

Trump's speech to Floridian Cubans and rich capitalist Venezuelan ex-pats was A NEOCON MANIFESTO ON REGIME CHANGE.

So-oh, how is this speech different from Bush speak on Iraq and Hillary/Obama speak on Libya and Syria? And Trump doesn't even have the WMD excuse for regime change! His excuse is scarrrry socialism; i.e. red scare! Trump is the Neocon McCarthy. Take that to the bank, Trump sheeple.

Posted by: Circe | Apr 6 2019 21:49 utc | 16

And Libya was once the richest country in Africa, with the highest standard of living. And it is reduced to barbaric chaos and destruction. Does Obama and Clinton have one minuscule iota of conscience? Does Sarkozy? What evil the so called civilised West unleashes on the World. All for power and control. Psychopaths.

Posted by: Gezzah | Apr 6 2019 22:02 utc | 17

All this death and destruction goes on Clinton II's death count card and Obama's death count card. What they call 'foreign policy' is simply murder.

Posted by: stevelaudig | Apr 6 2019 22:33 utc | 18

Haftar, a CIA product, would be a strong arm diktator, but not a benevolent one. Benevolence, aka Socialism will not be permitted by his handlers in the USA.

Maybe he can bullshet the benevolence with assistance from media. In the way that US Presidents pretend benevolence.

Posted by: fastfreddy | Apr 6 2019 22:45 utc | 19

Lozion @ 14: No need to apologise ... you're not responsible for how people react to your comments.

I move that Circe's off-topic comments about Trump being an Israeli pawn be removed. We can come to our own conclusions about Trump's connections to the pro-Israeli lobby and Netanyahu.

Posted by: Jen | Apr 6 2019 22:46 utc | 20

Txs Jen for the suggestion. By all means, if others feel like voicing their opinions on the matter, it may help our host decide what course of action to elect. A bar, is after all, an excellent venue for democratic exercise..


Posted by: Lozion | Apr 6 2019 23:19 utc | 21

*typo damn phone keyboard..

Posted by: Lozion | Apr 6 2019 23:20 utc | 22

Why is it that the only two choices available to the Libyan people is a strongman or the current chaos?

Posted by: Inkan1969 | Apr 6 2019 23:37 utc | 23

@19 Jen

How about AntiSpin's OT? Or is it just criticism is Trump and Zionism you wanna censor? Or maybe just lil
'ol inconvenient truthy me! I, unlike you contributed 2 comments on topic; you and sidekick, not so much. That's 0-2 where you're concerned.


Not surprised about Hafter's aggressive moves. Just over a week ago Hafter met with King Salman, and now he pulls this. Saudi Arabia is all the way behind this Hafter offensive. And since Syria we all know who the Saudis operate for! One more tidbit: Hafter turned on Gaddafi and helped overthrow him, so he was Team Hillary! Oops! looks like you're on the wrong side this time.

Hafter Libya KSA

Uh-oh. 0 for 3, Jen!

Posted by: Circe | Apr 6 2019 23:51 utc | 24

Correction: criticism of (not is) Trump

Posted by: Circe | Apr 6 2019 23:54 utc | 25

Hafter bio synopsis:

USING SALAFIST (MADkhalists aligned with Saud) TERRORISTS in his offensive for control ✔

Check, check, check, check and're definitely on the wrong side!

Posted by: Circe | Apr 7 2019 0:25 utc | 26

@19 count on my vote for Circe to remain.. All voices and all ideas should be heard..but maybe you can answer why cruel Netanyahu, Khashoggied MBS, casino Aldelson, Trojan Drump and associated chaos generators and regime change professionals known as Neocons have set out to deny peace to the humanity that occupies earth? or Alternatively explain why it is a mistake to believe they are not hell bent on such a mission.

Maybe Jen, you can explain how the interest of the humanity governed by the above persons serves the interest of those who live in America, Britain, France, Saudi Arabia, or Israel when their money and their efforts are diverted to assist the above named parties in shooting up and destroying Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Iran, Syria, Libya, Ukraine, Yemen and Venezuela? It would be really, really interesting to see from Jen's own keyboard the answers to these questions posted here. Thanks.

Posted by: snake | Apr 7 2019 0:37 utc | 27

Khalifa Haftar not *ter*

So before this offensive, our friend Khalifa met with the Saudis and...the Russians! Is this why you wrote this piece?

But-but. Here's the Russian reply:

Russia disowns haftar

Did Haftar promise Putin something if he gains control of Libya?

I wouldn't trust that CIA ass as far as I could spit.

Posted by: Circe | Apr 7 2019 0:51 utc | 28

If some of the commenters are going to start calling out other commenters by name and challenging them to off-topic ad hominem duels, then the thread will be derailed, and important discussion about Libya will be stifled.

So I trust that the sensible commenters will simply disregard the provocations. There should be a penalty for disrupting a discussion through provocative attacks on individuals. That penalty already exists and it's called shunning the provocateurs.

Posted by: Grieved | Apr 7 2019 0:57 utc | 29

@6 psychohistorian

Gaddafi was about to launch his gold-backed currency as well. It could easily have become a regional trade currency. I agree with you that it becomes more clear that the true forces behind all of the chaos and plunder are the forces that regard social benefit as a competitor to capital profit - which it no doubt is.

The real goals are to keep all populations divided through every kind of discord, while ruthlessly stamping out all efforts that would break the monopoly of capital, all endeavors that would allow humans to arise in their sovereignty and form cooperative and not-for-profit enterprises, communities and stores of value.

Like you, I increasingly see it as being nothing personal, and devoid of geopolitical aims, but simply automatic and viewed as an non-negotiable imperative. For the ruling forces, this is their livelihood, their very survival.

Posted by: Grieved | Apr 7 2019 1:04 utc | 30

Well, Haftar might be supported by KSA, since their arch-enemies from Qatar and Muslim Brotherhood support Tripoli islamist faction. But it is utterly retarded to say anyone "supports the wrong side". It's not as if there's a "right side" here. Anywhere there is an islamist faction, there can't be a "right side", and any faction supported by islamist scum from KSA, from Qatar or from UAE isn't a "right side" (of course, that also applies to any faction supported by the US or by Israel). Still, I don't think that Libya would fare better if both "wrong" factions were wholly wiped out; considering the human trend to screw up and the past record of foreign intervention from major powers, odds are that the new faction that would arise would be just as corrupt.

Posted by: Clueless Joe | Apr 7 2019 1:05 utc | 31

Circe, I view yours as a voice to be respected, yes you can be strident, but real passion lives in your every post and I respect that. Peace.

Posted by: frances | Apr 7 2019 1:10 utc | 32

b said; ". A strongman like Muhammad Ghaddafi can control it by distributing the income from its mineral resources and by keeping the Islamists down. Hafter may be able to replicate that."

Sharing resources with the people of Libya will NEVER fly. The corporate empire will crush anyone who tries it.

psycho @ 6 gives the answer;"the point for me was the precipitation of the murder of Ghaddafi for spreading the wealth of the country...socialism.....not allowed. And Ghaddafi was going to sell oil in other than US dollars....not allowed."

Bottom line truth psycho, thanks....

Posted by: ben | Apr 7 2019 1:18 utc | 33

frances @ 31 said;"Circe, I view yours as a voice to be respected, yes you can be strident, but real passion lives in your every post and I respect that. Peace."

I concur....

Posted by: ben | Apr 7 2019 1:20 utc | 34

This is a background piece that may be of interest to some. It's a 2017 story about the western media's then-awakening to the flourishing slave trade in Libya, and the complete eradication in all of the media stories of the NATO involvement in the destruction of that society.

I can't remember who linked it, in what article or discussion, but credit to that source:
Media Erase NATO Role in Bringing Slave Markets to Libya

Posted by: Grieved | Apr 7 2019 1:21 utc | 35

Lets see, the G7 asks Hafter and the LNA to stop the offensive. I am sure that group of bloodthirsty individuals are more worried about losing than saving lives. The question in my mind is who is supplying whom with weapons?

The article from Tass cited sounds like a non denial denial from Lavrov..

"Today we discussed Libya in detail taking into account the developments there. We keep a close eye on the armed forces’ advance, including the Libyan National Army and other groups, including those, which are illegal armed groups and control a considerable part of the country’s capital and some other areas," he said. "We exchanged information on how this situation is discussed by the UN Security Council. We are opposed to attempts to apportion blame unilaterally."

Notice the wording, the other side has illegally armed troops. Egypt and Russia are exchanging information on upcoming UN discussions. And again...

"We are concerned about the fact that some armed groups in certain parts of Libya said they would use warplanes against the Libyan National Army," he pointed out. "Those who have influence with these units, must prevent this escalation."

Whom would have such influence? The diplomacy of not blaming anyone, working like a statesman in the UN, and calling the opposing forces of the LNA "illegally armed". Russia is not "banking" on anyone. An interesting turn of phrase.

The whole Russian denial of the LNA advance to Tripoli sounds like a the perfect piece of statecraft to keep the EU happy and the UN mollified. Three steps forward, one step back.

Egypt certainly has a vested interested in national unity and a stable Libya free of Jihadists on their border...

In an interview released to the Egyptian newspaper al-Ahram Weekly, Haftar admitted his close cooperation with Egypt, especially on intelligence sharing and military assistance (2) (i.e. Egypt is sending weapons to Libya in violation of the UN Security Council Resolution 1970/2011 on arms embargo). Another evidence of the strong relation between Haftar and al-Sisi, confirming the high priority that Egypt places on stability of the Western border, is represented by the three official visits of the Libyan General to Cairo during the past year.

Egypt’s Security and Haftar: al-Sisi’s strategy in Libya

Sounds like Russia and Egypt have a strong interest in stabilizing Libya and may be funneling material and items of interest to the LNA. It would tie in with their work in Syria.

In the case of the EU and France you would thing they have an interest in a stable Libya but given their recent history one wonders. Their national unity elections sounds like more chaos and bloodbaths going forward.

Haftar, spending so much time in Virginia, may well have played them like a Stradivarius violin or just be sickened by the aftermath of the revolt against Qaddafi. Maybe he was double crossed on the outcome? One can only speculate. Blowback seems to be their worst enemy.

Posted by: dltravers | Apr 7 2019 1:23 utc | 36

@6 psychohistorian.. thanks... yes - what @4 ken states makes sense to me too.. it seems to be in line with my observations as well...

i am going to save my OT comments for the next day when the moa week in review post comes up.. and, i do have something to say!

Posted by: james | Apr 7 2019 1:31 utc | 37

Snake @ 26: I am only referring to Circe's braying about Trump's connections with Adelson and the Israeli govt and how whatever these criminals get up to are always exploited by Circe to vindicate his or her views and chide other MoA commenter as sheeple. As if we cannot figure out for ourselves (and could not work out during the 2016 election year) that Trump is not and was never going to be a knight in shining armour.

Posted by: Jen | Apr 7 2019 2:21 utc | 38

@35 Great post dhtravers. Where does Saif Al Islam fit in all this? He was pardoned by Haftar last year. Waiting in the wings for eventual elections after things quiet down? That wont fly with the West. Otherwise here is an interesting thread by a journo in Libya. His position is that things are far from over for the GNA. Caveat, he is ex-Foreign Policy:

Regarding my prior posts, of course everyone's opinion is welcome and I dont condone censorship but not being from the Exceptionnal Outlaw Empire of Chaos, I tire at reading one's ceaseless efforts to connect every issues & problems on the 3rd stone from the Sun with the Orangutan in DC and his "ZIONIST Overlords". As if things were that simple..

Posted by: Lozion | Apr 7 2019 2:23 utc | 39

@3 Circe

I don’t think anyone who pays attention to international geopolitics from a “reality-based” perspective denies the outsized influence enjoyed by the Zionist defenders of Israel. But people like you, with a fanatical interest in making Zionism the root cause of every ill that currently befalls the world, are overegging the pudding.

Equally ludicrous is the suggestion that the United States government has no sovereignty whatsoever over its affairs and defers always to Israeli interests control it. Israel/Zionism has huge influence over the west’s policies relating to Israel and the Palestinians, and various Zionist NGOs actively work to preserve Zionist Jews’ “protected status” in the west, which has the added benefit of helping Israel justify its continued existence as a Jewish supremacist state.

The Israeli/Zionist lens has a very narrow field of focus (self-preservation at the level of their current privileged status) and within that field it has a lot of influence. From an American POV, the Zionist/Israel lobby is the king of the politician buying special interest groups. But outside of their particular cause their influence is negligible. The whole of American domestic policy and the part of foreign policy that doesn’t involve the Middle East or Israel is not controlled or influenced by Zionist interests.

There is a whole industry dedicated to conflating Zionism and Judaism, and equating criticism of Israel/Zionism with antisemitism. Critics of Zionism are often lumped in with conspiracist antisemites who propagate the myth of the scheming and conniving omnipotent Jew who seeks to control the world. You, Circe, with your excited rants give them an easy target and help damage the reputation of principled people who oppose 21st century imperialism.

Once a person has convinced himself that something is true, he will always find evidence to support his assertion even when no evidence exists.

Also keep in mind that actual fascistic antisemites work these forums and try to ingratiate themselves with the regular posters and subtly try to introduce antisemitic tropes into the minds of impressionable people and lazy thinkers.

Don’t be an idiot.

Posted by: Daniel | Apr 7 2019 2:55 utc | 40

Circe and Jen

IMO you both have a point.

While Circe can be shrill, it's hard to fault her for trying to jolt people awake. Despite numerous warnings that Trump was not what he seemed, and clear history of US/Western psyops and propaganda campaigns - which included Obama the duplicitous - Trump apologists still ply their trade. And the dumb and deluded still buy their crap.

I know this first hand because few seem interested in exploring the evidence that I've described for Trump's having been "selected" to be President. Instead, most prefer to give the establishment the benefit of the doubt to the greatest possible degree. The view that Russiagate, for example, is anything more than warmed-over McCarthyism is crazy. And Trump is neither isolationist or anti-interventionist. He is 100% figurehead and tool.

Trump was installed by, and is a symptom of, a stubborn, butt-hurt establishment that would fight to the last deluded commoner for total global domination. I don't see any tension-reducing compromise or accommodation on the horizon. Only preparation for war. But those deluded commoners will gladly die for their delusions. Pawns in a game played by their "betters". Unless they wake up.

"Double-down" works . . . until it doesn't.

Seems like Venezuela is now the prime candidate for the start of a conflict that could quickly spread to other hot spots like Iran (both as proxy wars - initially).

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Apr 7 2019 3:06 utc | 41

The issue of OT posts might be approached by recourse to a cost/benefit analysis. In other words, we could ask whether the benefit of the intrusion outweighs the cost. Here, Circe's original post may have had a "cost" of being somewhat distracting, but IMAO that cost was materially outweighed by the "benefit" of bringing barfly attention to important evidence on a topic that is of recurrent interest to all.

Apologies for contributing to an ever-evolving set of distracting posts. LOL.

Posted by: Zakukommander | Apr 7 2019 3:08 utc | 42

Daniel @39

Excellent points.

@Circe please read Daniel @39 as constructive criticism.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Apr 7 2019 3:10 utc | 43

Lozion @ 38
Where does Saif Al Islam fit in all this?

I have no idea. All I can do is speculate.

Posted by: dltravers | Apr 7 2019 4:43 utc | 44

I certainly do not understand the internal political dynamics in Libya today. It is very difficult to figure out what Haftar actually represents. Here is a partial list of things that Haftar has done in the last 10 or 15 years.

.. He lived in Virginia, US and became a US citizen. Almost certainly worked with the CIA.
.. He returned to Libya after the killing of Ghadaffi and assembled remnants of the Libyan army under his command. He defeated the Islamist control of Benghazi through military action and toleration of their presence if they accepted his leadership.
.. Expanding his control to the west his forces destroyed ISIS groups and held public executions of their leadership.
.. He is now expanding his control over all of Libya and Tripoli is next.
.. In this latest venture it seems he has the active backing of Egypt, the UAE, France and Russia. Saudi Arabia and the US seem to oppose him but for the most part they have yet to display any coherent policy.

Now this is my attempt to assemble some facts here. Others may dispute some of these or enter other relevant facts. However my bottom line is that it is impossible to conclude from this that Haftar is some puppet for any specific nation. Calling him a CIA asset makes absolutely no sense at all.

All I can conclude is that he trying to rebuild the nation of Libya and is willing to accept the help of any willing nation.

Posted by: ToivoS | Apr 7 2019 5:08 utc | 45

Of course Russians will say they don't support Haftar three days before Putin and Erdogan (Haftar's nemesis) meet in Moscow.
The Turks are under tremendous pressure now, and Russians don't want to contribute to that. Erdogan is displaying admirable fortitude resisting American onslaught, and if Putin can help him in any way, we may see Russo-Turkish relationship blossom into a genuine friendship. That would radically change geopolitics of the Middle East and of Eurasia as a whole.
"Disowning" Haftar (which can't be genuine, since Russia and Egypt are on the same page here) is totally worth it.

Posted by: telescope | Apr 7 2019 5:30 utc | 46

Circe's posts were short and no trouble at all in my opinion, I don't see any real problem with only a little bit of OT.

Back on topic sort of.

Ghaddafi and western mercenaries:
Others here probably know more about this; I don't remember the name but there was a British (London office I think) company which I have the impression did a lot of security or mercenary work for Ghaddafi for a long time when it came to protecting oil infrastructure in Libya. My understanding was that they recruited from western European armed forces.

I mention it because it reminds me that no matter how messy or convoluted something looks reality is likely more complicated, and the further away one is the easier it is to force things into looking neat and orderly.

Libya, NATO, and slavery:
Slaves in Libya didn't magically come into existence the moment NATO started bombing and the majority of black Africans passing through Libya are not in any way Libyan. Saying that NATO was "empowering" human traffickers in Libya can all to easily become an exercise in denying that some Libyans made the choice to live off slavery and each and every day continue to choose to do so. If NATO bombing Libya empowered slavery then much worse must be said about the European individuals, NGOs, and European governments like those of Sweden, France, and Germany that directly assist or encourage the slavers and their "migration" under cover of claimed "humanitarian ideals" instead of stopping it.

Posted by: Sunny Runny Burger | Apr 7 2019 5:43 utc | 47

Jackrabbit @ 40:

I don't have an issue with commenters wanting to go off-topic on the MoA comments forums and nor do I have an issue with commenters claiming that Trump is not in a position to make his own decisions because he is beholden to Sheldon Adelson and other people connected to the pro-Israeli lobby in Washington DC.

I only have an issue with people who use the comments forums as their personal platforms to bang on one issue continuously, abuse and troll people who might disagree with their opinions, and play one-upmanship games with those commenters who call out such behaviour.

I have read Daniel's comment @ 39 and I agree with what he says. I would add also that continuous ranting not only attracts real anti-Semite fascists and call-centre trolls working for the Israeli government with their own agendas to derail comments forums, but it also brings other unwanted attention from governments or other agencies using algorithms to count the number of mentions of certain keywords and any terms those agencies link to the keywords, to monitor the activity on the comments forums, track particular commenters' activities and either shut down the blog or force WordPress to shut it down.

Posted by: Jen | Apr 7 2019 6:19 utc | 48

@39 Daniel

Not sure what your motive is for throwing shade, and your exercise in dilution of Zionist power. Any group that can affect mass public opinion with media control, bribe most politicians and ruin resisters (not just Palestinians), example Ilhan Omar, to subvert democracy and create negative tectonic shifts in geopolitics deserves obsessive attention moving forward.

Here's someone who gets how insidious and widespread Zionism has become:

Oh, you must be referring to the clan types in your last paragraph! That's funny, here I thought Zionists are their own worst supremacist-driven threat. Aren't they the ones giving Semites a really bad rap or rather rep...utation?

Maybe you take me for an idiot because you want everyone else to do the same. I'm not worried, you see, unlike you, I suffer from moral conviction, and I think it shows, and some people get that and those who don't, well maybe they're just not worth the trouble.


So iow, no side is right, especially if the UN and G7 are on the side of de-escalation? Wrong. De-escalation is good in this case. Escalation--very bad.

I can understand Russia's cagey ambivalence given that the Russians got blindsighted last time NATO took up the case of Libya at the U.N. Who are they going to trust? Definitely not a CIA asset, I hope! Escalation is exactly what a CIA operator is groomed for. Let's not forget Haftar is a U.S. citizen. That means his allegiance is to U.S. interests alone despite dual citizenship.

Egypt certainly has a vested interested in national unity and a stable Libya free of Jihadists on their border...

Sissy interested in national unity, are you kidding me??? Egypt is definitely not a clean player here. Correction, al-Sissy, who has a deep hatred and fear of the MB having any power. He's not interested in stability. He wants Haftar to crush everyone else into submission. That's not unity!

So, are you trying to convince us that the CIA let this Libyan traitor hang out with them at Langley for all that time, years, just so he could play them and turn on them? This is the kind of asset the CIA dream of. He wasn't double crossed. He was taught the art of double cross and swore allegiance to his new masters. Later he was on team Hillary to get rid of Gaddafi. Need I say more? Wrong side.


Haftar returned to Libya in early 2011. Gaddafi was killed in October of the same year. Haftar was involved in all previous failed attempts to topple and/or assassinate Gaddafi. The CIA was heavily involved with the rebel uprising against Gaddafi and Haftar was there at the time.

Does anyone believe that if Haftar has been going rogue on the plan for Libya he would not already have suffered the same fate as Gaddafi? I wonder if Younes' mysterious death was meant to clear the way for Haftar? Soon after Haftar returned there was a growing rift and rivalry between General Abdel Fattah Younes and Haftar. Hey, Haftar was CIA after all; Younes not so much.

Posted by: Circe | Apr 7 2019 6:35 utc | 49

Did Haftar go from being a CIA Asset to a Mossad Asset? It makes a lot of sense since Israel loves its Arab strongmen. Here's an article Richard Silverstein wrote in August 2017.

Israeli secret aid to Libya's strongman

Maybe Haftar is both a CIA and Mossad asset.

No wonder Trump has been so ambiguous on his Libya policy!

And then some of you pretend Zionists aren't mixed up everywhere. Further proof supporting Haftar is wrong-headed.

Posted by: Circe | Apr 7 2019 8:25 utc | 50

Some say western intervention was because Gadaffi was threatening to set up an African currency to rival the dollar and to stop selling Libya's oil in dollars. Since the intervention all of Libya's gold has diapeared, possibly to refill Fort Knox.

Posted by: Johny Conspiranoid | Apr 7 2019 8:55 utc | 51 < more on t he situation in Libya..

Posted by: snake | Apr 7 2019 9:22 utc | 52

Haftar obviously was a CIA asset, but then so were the death squads in Benghazi that snuffed the CIA's super-spook, Christopher Stevens. Has Haftar turned on his handlers back in Langley?

What adds to the confusion here is that the "Operation Mockingbird" mass media is openly pointing out that Haftar resided in Langley, Virginia when he was in America. That is about as close to the CIA coming out and shouting "He's one of ours!" as you can possibly get. Since the CIA's normal mode of operation is to deceive and disinform this suggests that Haftar may very well have slipped his leash.

Normally I would write off anyone who has been in bed with the CIA and is supported by the fascist House of Sod, but there is sufficient ambiguity at this point with regards to Haftar to hold off on that. It sure would be nice if he were motivated to restore the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya.

Posted by: William Gruff | Apr 7 2019 11:37 utc | 53

Have placed this news at SyrPer on the same subject with the latest. Thank you Berhnard for your excellent review.

"Some latest news from Libya:

1) Meanwhile Tripoli is the biggest prize for the LNA, the later has conducted a lightning attack on the far west of the country and managed to take control of an important border crossing, Wazzin, with it almost 100 kms of border with Tunisia was secured. Leaving only one border crossing under Muslin Brotherhood NATO backed regime, at Ras Ajdir, the most important one, I have used this border 15 years ago when I traveled to Tunisia and Libya, very busy border crossing but now is fully sealed by Tunisia military, afraid of fleeing terrorists from NW Libya. ...

2) Advances in the outskirts of Tripoli was partially slowed down yesterday and early today allowing foreigners to leave the area, two US Frigates collected hundreds of US citizens and other foreigners that are embedded with Muslin Brotherhood regime in Tripoli.
This lapse in time may have been agreed with the UN Protector of Muslin Brotherhood terrorists, Antonio Guterres, in Benghazi last Friday.
The fact is, NATO is freaking out, the very same criminal organization that destroyed Libya, has no clue what to do whatsoever right now, the puppet regime they have put in place, Muslin Brotherhood led GNA, which was used to steal the oil and gas from the Libyans for 8 years as well as to steal the gold reserve held by Gaddafi, is now fleeing like rats fleeing a sinking boat.

3) This morning, a major advance happened near Sawani bridge, 20 Kms SW of Tripoli, where the red arrow is located, it seems LNA is using all the main highways to approach the city. ...

4) One of the most important battle to come is for the control of the coastal highway to physically split the terrorists from Misrata and Tripoli, map below. ...

5) Lavrov was in Egypt yesterday, both countries have “publicly” shared news that they do not support the LNA push toward Tripoli, but on the ground, LNA is using weapons, sat intel, and experts from both countries. A lot of Russians are in Libya as part of the Wagner Company, and Russia has sent dozens of technical people to maintain and fix attack helis and jets. The tactic used by Russia and Egypt in Libya has been of deception so far, suppose no direct involvement, using private planes to deliver weapons thru third countries (mostly Belarus and UAE) and non National Military personal to support LNA.

6) The always excellent MoA take on regarding the recent developments in Libya and how it get to this point.

Libya - From Ghaddafi to Hafter

[links corrected
@Canthama - Please do not put the long URLs of a link into the textfield. It can otherwise break the page
- b.]

Posted by: Canthama | Apr 7 2019 12:25 utc | 54


You are one of the best sources of information around, but pleasetake five minutes to learn how to makea proper link. You have broken this page.

Posted by: Link Stickler | Apr 7 2019 12:40 utc | 55

@47 Jen. Yes, that is the crux of the matter. My admittedly shitty manners are only triggered by my desire to protect MoA, a beacon of truth in a world becoming more and more to the likeness of Orwell's dystopia and that is precious and should be preserved..

Posted by: Lozion | Apr 7 2019 12:46 utc | 56

@William Gruff #53

What we learned about USa is the thing about "all 17 intelligence agencies" :-D

With so many agencies there, it is quite possible some being in feud of CIA or at least with some CIA operations and crossing those.

Like Pepsi and Coke are different companies, while they both need "american life style" becoming global to benefit from it, they can cross one another campaigns and selling efforts.

Posted by: Arioch | Apr 7 2019 14:16 utc | 57

The LNA appears to have reached the sea to east and west of Tripoli.

The US Navy has carried out a rescue mission using at least one LCAC hovercraft to recover unknown individuals (probably US AFRICOM, along with CIA/MI6?) from Palm City / Janzour immediately west of Tripoli. US AFRICOM claims the withdrawal was made because of a lack of security guarantees (a fine sense of humor!).

Posted by: Yonatan | Apr 7 2019 14:40 utc | 58

Circe @ 49

So, are you trying to convince us that the CIA let this Libyan traitor hang out with them at Langley for all that time, years, just so he could play them and turn on them? This is the kind of asset the CIA dream of. He wasn't double crossed. He was taught the art of double cross and swore allegiance to his new masters. Later he was on team Hillary to get rid of Gaddafi. Need I say more? Wrong side.

No, I think you need to re read the post I said...

Haftar, spending so much time in Virginia, may well have played them like a Stradivarius violin or just be sickened by the aftermath of the revolt against Qaddafi. Maybe he was double crossed on the outcome? One can only speculate. Blowback seems to be their worst enemy.

Those are possibilities not conclusions. Very few insiders can say for certain what is going on. I merely took some quotes from the players and drew some ideas. If he wins then we will know in time by his actions going forward.

Sissy interested in national unity, are you kidding me??? Egypt is definitely not a clean player here. Correction, al-Sissy, who has a deep hatred and fear of the MB having any power. He's not interested in stability. He wants Haftar to crush everyone else into submission. That's not unity!

Actually Haftar winning is national unity. I hope here forward they use the Russian playbook that was used in Syria. That is, make deals with some of the tribes and militias and isolate the radicals for destruction. I am sure Algeria would not want these radicals on their border. One would have to be a lunatic to want head choppers in their neighborhood. A lunatic like the West that is who promotes a "head choppers for all" policy in the region. All except their favorite countries of course.

So iow, no side is right, especially if the UN and G7 are on the side of de-escalation? Wrong. De-escalation is good in this case. Escalation--very bad.

It was NATO, the EU, and the G7 types along with their trusted US partner that stated the whole mess and now they want deescalation? Where is the UN on punishing the players that started this? I trust their motives not at all. Have they admitted to their failures in this situation? They are completely unrepentant.

Deescalation may be good but all it is going to do is give both sides time to regroup for the final solution. More fighting is in the offing until the head choppers are isolated and destroyed.

Posted by: dltravers | Apr 7 2019 15:27 utc | 59

Circe;Trump is covering his ass,cause the msm against him.Who could you back?the democrats?pelosi?buttgieg?warren?sanders?Every candidate is corrupt.

Posted by: dahoit | Apr 7 2019 15:47 utc | 60

@56 L

Your profanity is now redeemed by your 20/20 vision. How noble!🙃

Let's be clear. All the power players involved want a piece of Libya pie and are hedging their bets with both sides with ambivalent comments while they give lip service to de-escalation.

Here's the U.S. position.:

The United States military has sought to remain neutral between the United Nations’ so-called Government of National Accord, or G.N.A., on one hand, and General Hifter’s forces, which he calls the Libyan National Army, or L.N.A., on the other.

“We don’t want to get in front of the diplomatic effort, and we want to maintain our neutrality,” General Waldhauser explained in remarks to the news media at a security conference in Munich in February, “because it’s very, very important that we don’t, all of a sudden, back one side that turns the other way.”

The Libyan militias “change allegiances quite regularly,” General Waldhauser continued. “And so our U.S. position has always been and continues to be to support the G.N.A. But at the same time, you know, Hifter and the L.N.A. are a factor there, and whatever solution comes to pass is going to involve the L.N.A. and Hifter.”

To prepare for all possibilities, General Waldhauser said, “we support the G.N.A. but we have lines of communications open with others,” including General Hifter.

So, Egypt KSA and Israel, U.S. allies, are all hoping for Haftar to rule Libya while the U.S. is hedging both sides. Do you really believe that at the end of the day Haftar would turn on the U.S. where he has established roots, was or still is a CIA asset, and where he secured citizenship and throw all this away to accommodate Russian interests instead? Naawh.

Pipe dream.

Posted by: Circe | Apr 7 2019 16:03 utc | 61

One more thing, the way I see it is that Haftar is a power-driven opportunist and tyrant who will take what he needs for the moment from Russia and once he's proven to the U.S. that he can hold power, Russia will be thrown under the bus. How neutral the U.S. will remain if he goes on a bloody rampage committing war crimes remains to be seen, but this is definitely not Syria.

When the dust settles, I'm not saying commercial ties won't exist as they do with Egypt, I'm just saying that geopolitical ambitions such as a Russian base will be out of the question. The ZEmpire will win this one whatever the outcome. Nothing more to see.

Posted by: Circe | Apr 7 2019 16:18 utc | 62

Posted by: Circe | Apr 7, 2019 12:03:10 PM | 61
Posted by: Circe | Apr 7, 2019 12:18:37 PM | 62

Your spin seems to be making you dizzy.
Haven't you noticed?

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Apr 7 2019 17:46 utc | 63

Gaddafi was dumped by the intel agencies:

although he cattered to them:
(Terror island and Gaddafi links)

because with him either dead or alive L1bya has a lot of 'resources' anyway:

and although Gaddafi was on the 'inside game' yet not even that saved him:

Ways the 'resources' are being managed for (W.Tarpley explains after 1:10) :

Nobody no matter how big or strong, or numerous, can afford to make deals with the devil.
'House always wins'.

Posted by: clockwork weather | Apr 7 2019 18:32 utc | 64


The Muslim countries that oppose the Muslim brotherhood (MB) are the ones supporting Haftar against the remaining UN supported Muslim brotherhood forces.

Furthermore, most support is financial. In the UAE case MBZ is deploying Eric Prince's air force against the opposition.

Haftar is for Haftar, as Erdogan is for Erdogan, etc...

Posted by: Krollchem | Apr 7 2019 18:50 utc | 65

Oh Lybia! My heart bleeds for you. They've stolen your rudder and destroyed your sails, they've left you adrift and overrun by pirates. Your dead cry out for justice and your living pray for peace. Oh Lybia, my heart bleeds.

Posted by: mourning dove | Apr 7 2019 19:55 utc | 66

Thank you b for the report on Lybia. As much as I appreciate your reporting and everything that you've built here at MoA, I have to say that I think it's an injustice to call Gaddafi a "strongman". That term, to me, reads like "dictator-lite", and it's an unfair description of a socialist revolutionary.
The report, and most of the comments about Lybia on this thread focus primary on the geopolitical aspect. This is certainly relevant, but I have to speak up for the socialist utopia that was destroyed and for it's benefactor.
At the time of the Lybian revolution, Lybia was the poorest country on a poverty stricken, heavily exploited continent. Literacy rates were in the teens. At the time of the coup and Gaddafi's assassination, the poverty rate was lower than in the Netherlands, literacy had claimed to the high 80's and was still climbing. Education and housing were human rights, and the largest public works project in the world (at that time) was underway -The Great Manmade River that was part of the Pan-African project to share Lybia's wealth and resources with the rest of Africa.
Lybians enjoyed direct democracy. They were able to propose legislation and they voted on government policy, foreign and domestic. Gaddafi didn't set himself up in oppulent palaces, but he did have a bulletproof tent. He was a Bedoin, living in a tent felt the most natural to him. After the revolution, he gave the people the power he had acquired. A military was established to provide for defence of the country, but against an illicit alliance of world powers, it was overwhelmed and the utopia was destroyed.
If anyone is supporting the Bolivarian revolution and refrains from referring to it's leaders by the nomenclature put forward by imperial forces, surely such support could, should, be given to a revolution and it's leader, that much more fully and with a much greater scale and scope exemplified a true socialist utopia and personified a socialist revolutionary.

Posted by: mourning dove | Apr 7 2019 20:46 utc | 67


The U.N. may support the MB, but imo, the U.S. does not support the MB (with strict limited exception). I equate Haftar with Mubarak and Sissy. Not sure where to put Erdogan, yet.

Posted by: Circe | Apr 7 2019 21:31 utc | 68

Hafter has open support from France, the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Russia. The Trump administration is not interested to step into the mess. Hafter is an old CIA asset and if he takes control there is a good chance that the U.S. will have influence over him. As long as Libyan oil flows and keeps the global oil price down Trump will be happy. Russia is trying to stay in the background to not give the anti-Russian forces in Washington an excuse to intervene.

Orange pres. is 'not stepping in to the mess' (don't want to be another likely 'What Difference Does It Make' person in the local political scene) embedded specialists from the Netanyahou faction likely are, which would very much like to oust Erdogan proxies from there and control the whole countrys' coastline which is on the opposite side of that big island that harbors a huge and interesting navy base and since they are almost to become major real estate owners there, 'Orange pres.' and pale 'Son In Law' AirBnB dude will likely take a cut.

It's all about prime real estate on the face of the planet. Put in will just say silent because they promissed him/them Caracas. Maybe Ir an too if they get their base... BUT the devil is in the details, so both of the above seem unlikely.

Meanwhile the not so vocal against/or pro forces in the Federation leaked:
Pravda: "We do not support Haftar".

Meanwhile Ira n gets a navy base near Lattakia???

Posted by: clockwork weather | Apr 7 2019 22:08 utc | 69

Mourning Dove @ 67:

It is my understanding that after 1977, Muammar Ghaddafi left the actual running of Libya to the Prime Minister and Cabinet. There were indeed people's committees that could propose legislation. But information on Libya's structures of government and decision-making is (as you know) either lacking or extremely biased against those systems of governance.

I tend to rely on Alexander Mercouris' article from his own blog, written way back in 2011, before he joined and later co-founded The Duran, for an understanding of the kind of government he considers Ghaddafi had created.

On other aspects of pre-2011 Libyan society that you refer to (such as the Great Man-made River Project, education and housing), I agree with you. Education was free and compulsory up to about Year 9 or Year 10 level; education beyond this level was still free but much of it was structured towards steering people into working for oil and other energy extraction industries and infrastructure development. However people who wanted to pursue university studies in other unrelated areas and had to go overseas to do so could rely on Libyan government grants that paid for their education and travel fees.

I wouldn't say Libya under Ghaddafi was completely a socialist utopia and I feel sure the eastern part of Libya (Benghazi and the old historical Cyrenaica region, where the monarchy that ruled Libya up to 1969 originally came from) had always been against Ghaddafi's government and nursed grievances and hostilities against Tripoli that were exploited by the US and Britain (at least: I don't know about France and Italy) later on.

Posted by: Jen | Apr 7 2019 22:59 utc | 70

It's really hard for me to grant credibility to an article that uses the word regime in it's title. The NYT did a report back in the day about the Lybia system of direct democracy if you consider that a credible source, and perhaps it was back then. Sorry, I don't have a link but I'm sure you can find it if you are interested.
The standard of living in Lybia was the highest on the continent, and
you are misinformed regarding the education opportunities. If a field of study was not available in Lybia, there were subsidies to cover living costs for foreign programs. If a job wasn't available in Lybian for someone's field of study, subsidies were provided until such a time as the field grew to support more jobs. There were limits on wealth, and even transportation was a right. Lybians paid pocket change for gasoline. Lybia had no external debt and enormous gold reserves.
If you are interested, read the Green Book. Some of the ideas may seem antiquated but he was mostly right. Much of it is astoundingly revolutionary and truly inspiring, and it outlines the basic structure of the form of direct democracy that was practiced there.

Posted by: mourning dove | Apr 7 2019 23:57 utc | 71

@70 Jen

Thanks for the Mercouris link. I miss reading his writing, which doesn't seem to be anywhere anymore. I always valued his ability to marshal facts.

Posted by: Grieved | Apr 8 2019 0:20 utc | 72

An African perspective as a counterweight. Africanvoices

Posted by: mourning dove | Apr 8 2019 1:07 utc | 73

From wsws

Posted by: mourning dove | Apr 8 2019 1:18 utc | 74

The Green Book, published in 1975, is available for download from Internet Archive. I'm not sure about the link, it's kinda long and isn't broken up with hyphens so I'm not going to post it, but if anyone is interested, it's easy to find, and it's a quick read

Posted by: mourning dove | Apr 8 2019 1:37 utc | 75

To me, what defines a socialist utopia is a social/economic program that meets the fundamental needs of the people and establishes those fundamental needs as Human Rights. It is a system that provides direct democracy and empowers it's people to direct the government and to determine policy. It is a system that eliminates poverty and raises the standard of living of all the people. It is a system based upon clearly stated and well defined principles of liberation.
We live in nations whose governments do not meet, or even aspire to this standard, and I think it's critical to give credit where it is due when such a standard has been not only aspired to, but has been met. And it was growing, spreading it's prosperity to the African continent.

Posted by: mourning dove | Apr 8 2019 2:37 utc | 76

Africa's most prosperous democracy

Posted by: mourning dove | Apr 8 2019 3:55 utc | 77

I'm not sure about the link, it's kinda long and isn't broken up with hyphens so I'm not going to post it, but if anyone is interested, it's easy to find, and it's a quick read
Posted by: mourning dove | Apr 7, 2019 9:37:42 PM | 74

I know you haven't asked for my help, but b's HREF formula/template for hiding a link under a red label, couldn't be simpler, or easier.

The only user input required is
1. An http address.
2. Your chosen label.

It won't take you more than a couple of minutes to figure out once you've decided to try.
No offense intended.

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Apr 8 2019 3:59 utc | 78

Grieved @ 72:

Alex Mercouris' articles for The Duran (and which Consortium News sometimes reprints) can be found at this link.

We miss him over at The New Kremlin Stooge. He used to be a regular vistor / commenter at The Kremlin Stooge before he joined

Posted by: Jen | Apr 8 2019 4:26 utc | 79

Yeah, I do feel insulted. You made an assumption that 1. I haven't made any effort because 2. if I had made any effort I'd understand it by now so therefore, 3. I must be stupid or lazy, and lying either way when I say that I'm trying my best. That No-offense-intend part didn't really help that much. Your comment still stung.
I don't get it. I don't. I have been told how simple it is and I'm sure that's true for most people. But I still don'tget it. I've tried, but that's the truth of it. If that's not good enough, I'm not going to internalize someone else's issue or jump through hoops for the approval of anyone who has such a negative opinion of me already. I'm not going to apologize AGAIN for something that I haven't even done in the first place. I haven't fkd up the formatting and I'm obviously trying not to. If you or anyone else here want to engage with me on the basis of mutual respect, I'm down with that, but I think I'm done with this topic.
No offense.

Posted by: mourning dove | Apr 8 2019 6:47 utc | 80

There's some info in this about Lybia's education programs, and Gaddafi's efforts to liberate Africa.

Posted by: mourning dove | Apr 8 2019 7:16 utc | 81

A reminder of what was in the HRC emails regarding Gaddafi and Lybia

Posted by: mourning dove | Apr 8 2019 8:13 utc | 82

Posted by: mourning dove | Apr 8, 2019 4:13:11 AM | 82

Bravo! I knew you could do it:-)

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Apr 8 2019 16:20 utc | 83

Wasn't me.

Posted by: mourning dove | Apr 8 2019 17:33 utc | 84

...The Russians Never Helped LIBYA when it was Bombed.!..Mr.Putin Looked Odd at saying WHY did you have to Kill Gaddafi and Bombed Libya.!!..I don't Trust Putin very Much because he too supports Zionism..

Posted by: Carlos Krueger | Apr 8 2019 20:58 utc | 85

Considering how the US MSM played the aftermath of Bush's war on Iraq, one would think they would also have shown the aftermath of Team Obama's destruction of Libya. But Libya has not been on the MSM radar since the end of the war. At the Time, it was played as HRC's use of soft (or smart) power. And Obama had to be portrayed as sitting on the fence to his advisers so the image of the Nobel Peace Prize awardee could be preserved and he above the fray. But the buck is supposed to stop somewhere. Obama ultimately owns Libya just as Bush owns Iraq. Both have blood on their hands no matter their handlers.

Right you are, Carlos (86). Part of the HRC soft power story was that she called Lavarov about the coming US actions. Of course, the Russians were pissed. That may have been one part of the reasons Russia finally stood up in Syria. They had had enough.

And Team Obama was supporting racists in the NTC who resented Gaddhafi's outreach to Africa and letting Africans work in construction and the oil fields. Among the initial lies were the stories of Gaddhafi importing mercenaries (black) to attack Benghazi. Then they added the Viagra story. Imagine that. The NTC pushing the racist trope of the big black bogeyman coming for your wives and daughters high on viagra. And yet our own government and media also pushed this story ... until it couldn't be confirmed. Then the story went away without any explanation or investigation.

Posted by: Curtis | Apr 8 2019 23:33 utc | 86

> The Russians Never Helped LIBYA when it was Bombed!

Why should them? How did that very Libya helped that very Russians when they were pillaged by West? For example, what happened to the debts Libya had before Soviet Union, when Russia was bleeding singlehandedly paying all the Soviet debts to Europe? Wasn't Libya then happily touring in Paris on the global "spend Russian money" party ?

The famous photo and its backup link

...Mr.Putin Looked Odd at saying WHY did you have to Kill Gaddafi and Bombed Libya

And what is odd there?

If my neighbor burns his house to the ground - I can not voice my astonishment of that senseless destruction?

Posted by: Arioch | Apr 9 2019 10:00 utc | 87

The OT discussions usually add something, or contribute to a net neutral environment, but the sarcasm, personal attacks and general presupposed dislike of certain commentators by others is, just, a massive cringe for a usually top notch place for discussion.

Circe, to be fair I don't agree with you 100% on a lot of what you say, I always appreciated your input over the years. I admire your steadfastness and wonder why those who disagree with you (or just dislike you it seems) can't just continue with their own thoughts and not respond to every single thing you write in chorus. One of the commenters trying to censor you by crying out for B to do something (when he's mentioned multiple times how much he values free discussion and sharing of ideas and opinions) are taking such a weird position - they make you seem MORE credible by being so disagreeable - and I personally don't even agree with you on a lot.

I think engaging with those attacking you does your points a disservice though. You DO have something to say and just responding to one line sarcastic attacks or people pointing out you've commented more than once in a thread isn't helping your perspective/points, or at least isn't adding anything. I appreciate the enthusiasm you put into your comments, but these types of people will dismiss you even if they're in agreement. And will only further derail things.

I still look forward to reading your comments on other threads however. I do not look forward to others trying to rile you up, as that will be the behavior that will ruin the valuable discussion that can be had here.

Guys, OT discussion happens on every thread. Stop pestering one commentator you disagree with (ignoring a post is so easy it's a non issue) or at least have a DISCUSSION instead of snarky one liners.

Posted by: GeorgeSmiley | Apr 9 2019 11:14 utc | 88

"@47 Jen. Yes, that is the crux of the matter. My admittedly shitty manners are only triggered by my desire to protect MoA, a beacon of truth in a world becoming more and more to the likeness of Orwell's dystopia and that is precious and should be preserved..

Posted by: Lozion | Apr 7, 2019 8:46:07 AM | 56"

I think myself and other commentators do not need you as some knight in shining armor in MoA's comment section defending us from another person's legitimate perspective. Every thread gets OT anyways, but she had something to say. This comment I quoted is not a viewpoint, it's just an analogy that is so over the top its ridiculous.

You need to learn to just ignore her instead of engaging like this and acting like you're her better. It reflects really badly when people say this kind of thing and makes it look like you are one of those people who are really self righteous and simply cannot remember to take a breath.

Posted by: GeorgeSmiley | Apr 9 2019 11:26 utc | 89

"Anne-Marie Slaughter, her director of policy planning at the State Department, notes that in conversation and in her memoir, Mrs. Clinton repeatedly speaks of wanting to be 'caught trying.' In other words, she would rather be criticized for what she has done than for having done nothing at all."
from the NYT story on her smart power.
Yes, she should have been criticized on the deaths (murder) of thousands and the destruction and robbery of a country that led Africa in standard of living. Why didn't the media hold her to account? Or was this mission accomplished and time to sweep it under the rug?

Posted by: Curtis | Apr 9 2019 16:56 utc | 90

if “you break it, you own it”???
None of these people have ever owned their actions.

Posted by: Curtis | Apr 9 2019 16:59 utc | 91

My deepest regret for copy paste the post on Libya above as is, I should have adapted to MoA. Sorry for breaking the pages. Won't happen again.

Posted by: Canthama | Apr 10 2019 19:25 utc | 92

@george smiley... you're funny... you want us to ignore others, and yet you are not doing as you preach.. you are going to have to package your ideas better then that for anyone to buy into them..

of relevance.. from rt..

"EU parliament head Tajani says France & Italy divided over Libya

"France and Italy are divided over policy towards Libya despite the official position of unity stated by the EU’s foreign policy chief, the head of the European Parliament said on Wednesday. Parliament President Antonio Tajani, who is Italian, urged EU countries to speak with a single voice on the renewed crisis in Libya. Rival forces are fighting for control of the capital Tripoli. France and Italy both had “diverging interests,” Reuters quoted Tajani as saying. France, which has oil assets in eastern Libya, has provided military assistance in the past years to Khalifa Haftar in his eastern stronghold, according to Libyan and French officials. Italy, the former colonial power and a big player in Libya’s oil sector, has supported the UN-backed PM Fayez al-Sarraj.

Posted by: james | Apr 11 2019 0:57 utc | 93

mourning dove, thanks for your posts above.

The stage was set via the years long complete inversion of reality by demonizing the extraordinarily effective leadership and accomplishments of Ghaddafi, and then, "the supreme crime", a war of aggression, waged by many countries, camouflaged by lies, and the destruction of the great success story Libya had become; and its replacement by hell on Earth .

Re b's description above: I don't know where b gets that Russia is "openly supporting" Hafter. First, he is US asset and CIA; and as Lavrov has said: "we have never tried to bank on anyone. I am certain this is the way one should act in this case."

Also, b's description of the American attack on Libya as "killing government troops" is true as far as it goes, but the NATO bombing destroyed and wounded many civilians and civilian infrastructure.

Posted by: Robert Snefjella | Apr 19 2019 22:46 utc | 94

The comments to this entry are closed.