Former Italian President Francesco Cossiga Says CIA, Mossad Behind 9/11

It’s common knowledge, he reveals, CIA, Mossad behind terror attacks

American Free Press

Former Italian President Francesco Cossiga, who revealed the existence of Operation Gladio, has told Italy’s oldest and most widely read newspaper that the 9-11 terrorist attacks were run by the CIA and Mossad, and that this was common knowledge among global intelligence agencies. In what translates awkwardly into English, Cossiga told the newspaper Corriere della Sera:

“All the [intelligence services] of America and Europe…know well that the disastrous attack has been planned and realized from the Mossad, with the aid of the Zionist world in order to put under accusation the Arabic countries and in order to induce the western powers to take part … in Iraq [and] Afghanistan.”

Cossiga was elected president of the Italian Senate in July 1983 before winning a landslide election to become president of the country in 1985, and he remained until 1992.

Cossiga’s tendency to be outspoken upset the Italian political establishment, and he was forced to resign after revealing the existence of, and his part in setting up, Operation Gladio. This was a rogue intelligence network under NATO auspices that carried out bombings across Europe in the 1960s, 1970s and ’80s. Gladio’s specialty was to carry out what they termed “false flag” operations—terror attacks that were blamed on their domestic and geopolitical opposition.

In March 2001, Gladio agent Vincenzo Vinciguerra stated, in sworn testimony, “You had to attack civilians, the people, women, children, innocent people, unknown people far removed from any political game. The reason was quite simple: to force … the public to turn to the state to ask for greater security.”

Cossiga first expressed his doubts about 9-11 in 2001, and is quoted by 9-11 researcherWebster Tarpley saying “The mastermind of the attack must have been a sophisticated mind, provided with ample means not only to recruit fanatic kamikazes, but also highly specialized personnel. I add one thing: it could not be accomplished without infiltrations in the radar and
flight security personnel.”

Coming from a widely respected former head of state, Cossiga’s assertion that the 9-11 attacks were an inside job and that this is common knowledge among global intelligence agencies is illuminating. It is one more eye-opening confirmation that has not been mentioned by America’s propaganda machine in print or on TV. Nevertheless, because of his experience and status in the world, Cossiga cannot be discounted as a crackpot.

A Syriza victory will mark the beginning of the end of Greece's tragedy

The Guardian   
Costas Douzinas
Joanna Bourke

A vote for the left today will drastically change the austerity policies that have created a humanitarian crisis 

The Financial Times Deutschland last week published an article on its front page headlined "Resist the demagogue". It was written in Greek. The article advised the Greeks to reject the radical left Syriza party and vote for the rightwing New Democracy today. It is the culmination of an astounding campaign of fear and blackmail against the democratic right of Greeks to elect a government of their choice.

Angela Merkel, the European commission president José Manuel Barroso, and even George Osborne, have ordered the Greeks to vote the right way. This direct intervention into the democratic process of a sovereign state follows a plethora of threats and rumours, secrets and lies, telling people that if they vote for Syriza, the country will be ejected from the euro and untold catastrophes will follow.

Why are the European elites carrying out this unprecedented campaign, which strikes at the heart of the EU and would lead to outrage if the target were the British, the Italians, or the French? The reason is simple. If the Greeks vote a Syriza government into office, the EU and the IMF will have to drastically change the austerity policies that created an economic disaster and a humanitarian crisis.

The 6 May result saw Syriza's share of the vote jump from 4% to 17%, while the New Democracy and Pasok parties, which had alternated in government with a combined 80% of the vote in the last 40 years, collapsed to 32%. On 7 May, the Europeans started admitting the Greeks have been punished disproportionately, and that austerity does not work and must be mitigated. On 17 June, a Syriza victory will be the first defeat of austerity in Europe and will have international repercussions.

The belated admission by the IMF and EU "experts" that austerity does not work is a direct result of the 6 May results. The figures are staggering: more than 20% contraction of output over four years; 22% unemployment and 54% youth unemployment; a 24-point jump in the poverty index; and a 50% reduction in the salaries and pension of civil servants. The second memorandum moved to the private sector, abolishing collective bargaining and other basic labour law protections, as well as cutting the minimum wage and unemployment benefits by up to 32%.

World Collapse Explained in 3 Minutes

There is an Alternative to Neoliberal Monetary Austerity

Global Research
Michael Hudson

Eurozone

I have just returned from Rimini, Italy, where I experienced one of the most amazing spectacles of my academic life. Four of us associated with the University of Missouri at Kansas City (UMKC) were invited to lecture for three days on Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) and explain why Europe is in such monetary trouble today – and to show that there is an alternative, that the enforced austerity for the 99% and vast wealth grab by the 1% is not a force of nature.

Stephanie Kelton (incoming UMKC Economics Dept. chair and editor of its economic blog, New Economic Perspectives), criminologist and law professor Bill Black, investment banker Marshall Auerback and me (along with a French economist, Alain Parguez) stepped into the basketball auditorium on Friday night. We walked down, and down, and further down the central aisle, past a packed audience reported at over 2,100. It was like entering the Oscars as People called out our first names. Some told us they had read all of our economics blogs. Stephanie joked that now she understood how the Beatles felt. There was prolonged applause – all for an intellectual rather than a physical sporting event.

With one difference, of course: Our adversaries were not there. There was much press, but the prevailing Euro-technocrats (the bank lobbyists who determine European economic policy) hoped that the less discussion of possible alternatives to austerity, the easier it would be to force their brutal financial grab through.

All the audience members had contributed to raise the funds to fly us over from the United States (and from France for Professor Alain Parguez), and treat us to Federico Fellini’s Grand Hotel on the Rimini beach. The conference was organized by reporter Paolo Barnard, who had studied MMT with Randall Wray and realized that there was plenty of demand in Italian mass culture for a discussion of what actually was determining the living conditions of Europe. His aim was to show that the emerging financial elite hopes to use this crisis as their opportunity to carve out personal fiefdoms by privatizing the public domain of the governments they have seduced, bribed or coerced into unnecessary debt. Instead of using a central bank to finance their deficits, governments are told to dump these assets under distress conditions at fire sale prices. So governments end up beholden to bondholders and Eurocrats drawn from neoliberal ranks.

Paolo and his enormous support staff of translators and interns provided us an opportunity to give an approach to monetary and tax theory and policy that until recently was almost unheard of in the United States. Just one week earlier the Washington Post published a review of MMT (followed by a long discussion in the Financial Times . But the theory remains grounded primarily at the UMKC’s economics department and the Levy Institute at Bard College, with which most of us are associated.

The basic thrust of our argument is that just as commercial banks now create credit electronically on their computer keyboards (creating a bank account credit for borrowers in exchange for their signing an IOU at interest), so governments can create their own money. They can reclaim this proper function without incurring needless interest-bearing debt to private bondholders or from banks that create credit by electronic fiat. Government computer keyboards can provide nearly free credit creation to finance spending.

Once the money is created by government, the crucial difference is that governments spend it (at least in principle) to promote long-term growth and employment, invest in public infrastructure, research and development, provide health care and other basic economic functions. Banks have a more short-term time frame and narrowly self-interested motivation. Some 80% of their loans are mortgages against real estate. Banks lend against collateral in place, and the economy’s largest assets are land and buildings. Although banks loans also are used to finance leveraged buyouts and corporate takeovers, most new fixed capital investment by corporations is financed out of retained earnings, not bank credit.

And contrary to popular belief, the stock market has ceased to be a source of such financing. Textbook diagrams still depict it as raising money for new capital investment. Unfortunately, it has been turned into a vehicle to buy out companies on credit (e.g., with high interest junk bonds), replacing equity with debt (“taking a company private” from its stockholders). Inasmuch as interest payments are tax-deductible – on the pretense that they are a necessary cost of doing business – corporate income-tax payments are lowered. And what the tax collector relinquishes is available to be paid out to the bankers and bondholders who get rich by loading the economy down with debt.

The upshot is that the flow of corporate earnings is not used for productive investment, but is diverted to the financial sector – not only to pay interest and penalties to banks, but for stock buybacks intended to support stock prices and hence the value of stock options that managers of today’s financialized companies give themselves.

Welcome to the post-industrial economy, financial style. Industrial capitalism has passed through a series of stages of finance capitalism, from Pension-Fund capitalism via Globalized Dollarization and the Bubble Economy to the Negative Equity stage, foreclosure time, debt deflation, and austerity – and now what looks like debt peonage in Europe, above all for the PIIGS: Portugal, Ireland, Italy, Greece and Spain. (The Baltic countries of Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania have been plunged so deeply into debt that their populations are emigrating to find work and flee debt-burdened real estate. The same has plagued Iceland since its bank rip-offs collapsed in 2008.)

Euro Zone Considers Solution of Last Resort

Der Spiegel

The ink on the most recent European Union summit agreement was hardly dry before it became clear that it was insufficient. With investors now increasingly wary of Italy, the consensus is growing that the European Central Bank -- and the IMF -- will have to play an even greater role. But will it be enough? By SPIEGEL Staff

When government heads from Germany and the US get together, protocol usually calls for as much pomp as possible: honor guards, hymns, flag parades and the like.

But the tone was decidedly more businesslike at the G-20 summit in Cannes last Thursday. German Chancellor Angela Merkel and US President Barack Obama, together with US Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and German Finance Minister Wolfgang Schäuble, met in a mundane conference room at the five-star Intercontinental Carlton Hotel. The group had serious issues to discuss.

Merkel reported on the results of a meeting held a day earlier -- during which she and French President Nicolas Sarkozy had told Greek Prime Minister Georgios Papandreou exactly what they thought about his (now cancelled) plans to hold a national referendum on the euro bailout package. Obama and Geithner, however, were not impressed. The euro crisis continues to worsen, the pair grumbled. It is time, they said, for Europe to finally take decisive action. The decisions taken at the European Union summit in late October were not enough, they complained.

In response, Merkel and Schäuble recited the long list of measures the Europeans had recently initiated. But in reality, they had little to offer in reply to Washington's analysis. The euro crisis, Obama warned, now threatens the global economy.

Too little, too late. That has been the global public's assessment of European efforts to rescue its currency -- for the last one and a half years. And there is every indication that it will remain that way, even after the most recent G-20 meeting. Indeed, concurrent to the meeting in Cannes, the euro zone experienced what was likely the most ridiculous week of events since the crisis began: a Greek referendum announced on Monday, a reversal on Thursday, a national unity coalition promised in Athens on Friday and Papandreou's resignation on Sunday. Things changed almost by the hour, it seemed. And there is still little reason for optimism.

Half-Hearted and Half-Baked

Greece will keep the euro for the time being -- that much is certain. But it also seems clear that this is neither a guarantee of economic health in Greece nor a secure future for the common currency. On the contrary, there were growing doubts on financial markets last week as to whether the resolutions reached at the late-October European summit would be sufficient.

At that meeting, European leaders leveraged their bailout fund to more than a trillion euros. But what was celebrated a week ago as a "tour de force" and a "breakthrough" is now viewed as half-hearted and half-baked. Hardly a politician or economic expert believes that Greece can be rehabilitated under the more current plan from Brussels. And now there are also growing concerns about Italy. Interest rates for Italian treasury bonds reached a new record high last week, and the managers of the European Financial Stability Facility (EFSF) were unwilling to risk tapping the global financial markets. The planned issue of a new EFSF bond was cancelled at the last minute.

Not surprisingly, the mood was grim among the leaders gathered on the French Riviera last week for the G-20 summit. The conclusion, after countless discussions about the crisis, was that much more radical measures are needed. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the European Central Bank (ECB) are to take over the management of the debt crisis in the future, and Germany's currency reserves are no longer off limits. Last week Germany's central bank, the Bundesbank, narrowly managed to prevent portions of those reserves from being used to fill the IMF coffers.

Can the "big bazooka" that US politicians, in particular, like to invoke actually save the euro? Many economists are skeptical, because it is primarily economic imbalances that are creating ever-widening rifts between countries in the European currency area. The economic divide between the north, with its strong export economies, and the south, with its high consumption, has grown even further. At the same time, citizens are losing confidence in Europe's ability to manage the crisis.

'Run For Your Lives'

"Run for your lives" is the new motto in Europe, and not just among banks and insurance companies, which are selling off southern European bonds as quickly as they can, but also among ordinary holders of savings accounts. Banks and regulatory agencies are noticing that anxious citizens throughout Europe are trying to bring their money to safety. The flight of capital from Italy, Spain and Greece is in full swing.

Since the beginning of the crisis, ordinary Greeks have withdrawn about €50 billion ($69 billion) from their accounts, or a fifth of total deposits. In May, when the first rumors about a possible withdrawal from the euro zone were making the rounds, the Greeks withdrew €1.5 billion from their accounts within 48 hours. And it is no longer just the rich who are moving their money to a safe place. A Greek nun recently closed her convent's bank account, telling the bank employee that she needed the €700,000 in the account for renovations. But when pressed by the bank employee, she finally admitted that she was worried about her order's assets.

Libya: A Brutal, Gratuitous Slaying, the New World Order in All Its Transparent Barbarism

Global Research
By Rick Rozoff

How are you today, Mr. Rozoff?

Rather distressed by the news of this morning. Or yesterday morning in your case.

Ok, what is your first impression?

It was a brutal, gratuitous slaying of an almost 70-year-old man, killed after being captured. And if the intent of 216 days of NATO bombing was to kill him in the first place, which is clearly the case, with the multiple bombings of his compound in Tripoli, which in one case killed one of his sons and three grandchildren, it is clearly targeted killing and I suppose NATO can now claim success. It has got what it wanted.

President Barack Obama said that there is going to be a pull-out from Libya very soon, so in your mind does that mean the objective has been met?

Yes, it has entirely. Regime change, take-over of Africa’s largest oil reserves, the incorporation of Libya, which hitherto had been the only North African country that was not a member of NATO’s so-called Mediterranean Dialogue, into what is now according to Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen a military partnership with the North Atlantic Alliance... So in every sense their objective has been accomplished. It’s certainly nothing that is going to benefit the Libyan people.

You don’t see this as being justice for the oppressed Libyan people? I mean there are people saying that Gaddafi was a terrible guy. He killed thousands so he deserved to die.

There is just so much – what term do I want to use? – low taste, gratuitous reveling in the murder of this man, who was born 70 years ago in the very city he was murdered in on the 216th day of NATO’s bombing of his country. He was born under Italian Fascist occupation and he died under NATO occupation. I think the parallel there can’t be missed, including the fact that Italy supplied some of the warplanes that have devastated his country since the middle of March, since March 19th. If he was the monster they’ve portrayed him as being – and I invite your listeners to go to the NATO website and see some of the crude caricatures of Gaddafi they’ve posted over the last few days – wall graffiti and so forth – portraying him in a demeaning and belittling way, to further dehumanize him preparatory to murdering him.

Major U.S. Banks At Risk If European Debt Crisis Spreads

Huffington Post
Bonnie Kavoussi

If European politicians are unable to contain their sovereign debt problems, Wall Street could be on the brink of another financial crisis, according to economists.

Although U.S. banks have limited their direct exposure to Greece, they have loaned hundreds of billions of dollars to European banks and governments that may not be able to pay them back, according to the Bank for International Settlements. If some European governments and banks are forced to default on at least part of their debt, American banks could lose a significant amount of money on that account alone.

The resulting panic from investors could compound the losses. Short-term borrowing costs would spike, bank stock prices would plummet and investors could demand their money from banks, several economists say. In a repeat of the liquidity crisis of 2008, some U.S. banks could run out of the money necessary to fund their day-to-day operations.

"We've seen this already," said Jay Bryson, global economist at Wells Fargo Securities. "Some sort of financial crisis in Europe would be enough to finally push the United States economy back into a recession."

Some predict that a European financial crisis would spread quickly to U.S. shores. The pain would not come directly from government defaults; U.S. banks have loaned just $36.2 billion to the five European governments that are in danger of defaulting: Greece, Ireland, Portugal, Spain and Italy. But U.S. banks have also loaned $60.6 billion to banks in those five countries, and $275.8 billion to banks in Germany and France, according to data from the Bank for International Settlements.

A string of sovereign debt defaults would endanger the survival of major European banks, including those in France and Germany, which hold a large amount of troubled sovereign debt on their books, some economists note. According to Bryson, French banks' exposure to the five European countries that are in danger of defaulting amounts to 25 percent of France's gross domestic product, and the exposure of German banks to those countries is worth 15 percent of Germany's total output.

Sudden European government defaults could spur panicked investors to demand their deposits back from European banks, possibly forcing those banks to run out of money and declare bankruptcy. Several economists say that even if the European Central Bank steps in to save major European banks, some may partially default on U.S. bank loans to stay afloat -- an outcome that would cause major losses for U.S. banks and put them at risk of a bank run, when investors demand their deposits back all at the same time.

U.S. banks could face a financial crisis even before the crisis in Europe gets that far. Bryson outlined three scenarios in which a financial crisis could spread from Europe to the United States. A full-fledged financial crisis would ensue if "the crisis goes viral before the backstops are in place," he said.

First, the Greek government could cave in to protestors and stop agreeing to Europe's demands for additional budget cuts. In that case, the eurozone would stop lending to Greece and Greece would run out of cash and be forced to declare bankruptcy. The shock of a sudden Greek default could cause investors to demand higher interest rates from other troubled European governments, which could subsequently default. European banks that have loaned to those countries could run out of money and be at risk of defaulting on loans from U.S. banks, which could face higher borrowing costs and bank runs of their own.

Second, a eurozone country could vote against giving Europe more authority to help prevent a financial crisis. European parliaments are now debating whether to expand the powers of the European Financial Stability Facility (EFSF), which is stocked with 440 billion euros that it can loan to troubled governments during a crisis. Europe tentatively has agreed to allow the EFSF to help recapitalize troubled banks, make precautionary loans and buy troubled government debt -- but all 17 eurozone governments need to separately approve the plan.

If one eurozone country balks and Europe fails to expand the powers of the fund, then the stock market could plunge. It could become more expensive for European banks and governments to borrow, placing them more in danger of default.

Third, European leaders could continue to drag their feet on finding a larger solution, in which case borrowing costs for European governments and banks would stay high, prolonging the crisis. A government or financial institution would be likely to declare bankruptcy in only a matter of time.
It remains largely unknown which U.S. banks are particularly exposed to the risks in Europe, so investors have drawn their own conclusions. The insurance market reveals that investors believe Morgan Stanley is most at risk, followed by Bank of America, Goldman Sachs and Citigroup, respectively, according to market data provider CMA. Bank of America's debt now is more than three times more expensive to insure than during the height of the financial crisis in October of 2008.

Ex-CIA chief acknowledges open secret — drones

Raw Story

US Defence Secretary Leon Panetta on Friday acknowledged what has long been an open secret — that the CIA deploys armed Predator drones to hunt down Islamist militants.

The US government officially declines to admit to the spy agency’s drone strikes, but Panetta — who served as Central Intelligence Agency director until taking over the Pentagon in July — made two casual references to the CIA’s use of robotic aircraft during a visit to US bases in Italy.

“Having moved from the CIA to the Pentagon, obviously I have a hell of a lot more weapons available to me in this job than I did at CIA — although Predators aren’t bad,” Panetta told an audience of sailors at the US Navy’s Sixth Fleet headquarters in Naples.


Later at a joint US-Italian air base in Sigonella, Panetta thanked air crews for their role in the NATO air campaign over Libya as he stood in front of a Global Hawk drone, a larger unmanned aircraft that flies at high altitude for surveillance missions.

Panetta cited the important role of drones in the Libya operation, including the Predator drones.
Predators are “something I was very familiar with in my past job,” he said.

After Panetta spoke, a Predator drone took off from the base — right on cue.

The military does not hide its own drone flights in Libya or the war in Afghanistan, in contrast to the CIA’s covert missions to take out Al-Qaeda extremists in Pakistan, Yemen and elsewhere.

It was not the first time Panetta has made references to the drone programme, which US officials credit with severely weakening Al-Qaeda.

As CIA director, he once alluded to the drone strikes against Al-Qaeda as “the only game in town”.

Norway to fly last Libya mission

News24

Norway will fly its last combat mission in Libya on Saturday, two days before the official end of its role in the Nato-led air war, an alliance official told AFP.

Norway, one of eight Nato members that have conducted air strikes in the four-month-old operation, was the first to set an end-date for its participation when it decided last month to withdraw on August 01.

"The last day Norwegian aircraft will fly on July 30," the Nato official said.

"We appreciate and respect the decisions of all contributing nations to provide what they can to the mission," the official said. "Norway has done a great deal but, at the end of the day, the mission continues."

Norway originally deployed six F-16 fighters to the mission before reducing it to four last month. The government explained that its small air force could not sustain a large air contribution for a long period of time.

Only eight of Nato's 28 member states have flown bombing missions since the alliance took command of the operation on March 31: Norway, Britain, France, Canada, Belgium, Denmark, Italy and the United States.

London has increased its contribution by adding four Tornado jets, effectively making up for the loss of the Norwegian planes.

Nato officials say Norway's departure will not affect the tempo of air operations, which have averaged more than 100 sorties per day including around 50 missions aimed at hitting targets.

The Scandinavian country, beset by a bombing and shooting spree committed by a confessed far-right extremist, will continue its involvement in the operation with 10 officers posted at the Libya air command centre based in Italy.

Gaddafi's son's killing puts Nato in line of fire

The Guardian
Harriet Sherwood

Russia, Venezuela, Italy join Libyan regime in accusing Nato of attempting to assassinate Muammar Gaddafi

The Libyan regime's claims that Nato is attempting to assassinate Muammar Gaddafi have intensified following the apparent death of one of the leader's sons and three of his grandchildren in an air strike on Tripoli.

Gaddafi was at the one-storey house in a residential area of Tripoli when the missile struck late on Saturday, according to the government spokesman Moussa Ibrahim.

In a rare acknowledgement that security around Gaddafi may not be watertight, Ibrahim told reporters that intelligence about Gaddafi's whereabouts or plans must have been leaked to Nato.

The missile struck the house of Saif al-Arab, 29, the youngest and least well-known of Gaddafi's seven sons, just after 8pm on Saturday during a family gathering. The three grandchildren who were killed were under the age of 12, said Ibrahim.

David Cameron insisted that Nato was acting within the remit of the UN security council resolution, which authorised military actions to protect civilians.

But officials in Russia and Venezuela criticised the attack. "More and more facts indicate that the purpose of the anti-Libyan coalition is to physically destroy Gaddafi," said Konstantin Kosachev, a Russian legislator.

Nato said it had carried out a precision strike against a known command and control building. "All Nato's targets are military in nature and have been clearly linked to the Gaddafi regime's systematic attacks on the Libyan population and populated areas. We do not target individuals," said Lieutenant General Charles Bouchard, commander of Nato's Operation Unified Protector.

"I am aware of unconfirmed media reports that some of Gaddafi's family members may have been killed," he said. "We regret all loss of life, especially the innocent civilians being harmed as a result of the ongoing conflict. Nato is fulfilling its UN mandate to stop and prevent attacks against civilians with precision and care – unlike Gaddafi's forces, which are causing so much suffering."

The strike came hours after Gaddafi called for a ceasefire in the two-and-a-half-month civil war in a speech delivered live on Libyan state television. The Libyan government has repeatedly said it is ready for a political resolution to the conflict and a ceasefire, while continuing to launch military assaults on opposition forces, particularly in Misrata and the western mountains region.

"We renew our call for peace and negotiations," said Ibrahim following the air strike. "What we have now is the law of the jungle. How is this helping in the protection of civilians?"

Cameron declined to comment on the "unconfirmed report", but told the BBC: "The targeting policy of Nato and the alliance is absolutely clear. It is in line with UN resolution 1973 and it is about preventing a loss of civilian life by targeting Gaddafi's war-making machine. That is obviously tanks and guns and rocket launchers, but also command and control as well."

The Libyan regime will use the apparent death of close members of Gaddafi's family to reinforce its claims that Nato is acting illegitimately and that Libya is a victim of a western plot to topple Gaddafi.
UN resolution 1973 permits military action to protect Libyan civilians, which has been interpreted as covering Libyan military facilities, such as command and control centres, as well as military equipment in the field. It does not permit the specific targeting of individuals.

However some politicians in the west have urged Nato to target Gaddafi. "We must cut the head of the snake off," US senator Lindsey Graham said a week ago after the bombing of a building within Gaddafi's Tripoli compound.

Journalists taken to the scene of Saif al-Arab's house in a smart neighbourhood of the capital reported seeing an unexploded missile lying amid shattered concrete and twisted metal. A large crater exposed what appeared to be an underground bunker.

In his 80-minute speech on Libyan state TV in the early hours of Saturday morning, Gaddafi said: "I'm not leaving my country. No one can force me to leave my country, and no one can tell me not to fight for my country."

He described Nato's military intervention in Libya as "a massacre".

'US To Recoup Libya Oil From China'

Interview with Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, former assistant secretary of US Treasury

by Dr. Paul Craig Roberts

Global Research

Press TV has interviewed Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, former assistant secretary of US Treasury from Panama City, who gives his insight on the revolution in Libya and why US President Barack Obama needs to overthrow Qaddafi when no other US presidents did.

 

Press TV: Russia has criticized NATO for going far beyond its UN mandate. In other news a joint Op Ed is going to be written by Obama, Cameron and Sarkozy who have said that “leaving Qaddafi in power would be an unconscionable betrayal to the Libyan people”. 

We do know that the mandate does not call for regime change; the Obama administration has been saying they are not in there for regime change; but things seem a little different now don't they? 

Roberts: Yes they do. First of all, notice that the protests in Libya are different from the ones in Egypt or Yemen or Bahrain or Tunisia and the difference is that this is an armed rebellion. 

There are more differences: another is that these protests originated in the eastern part of Libya where the oil is - they did not originate in the capital city. And we have heard from the beginning credible reports that the CIA is involved in the protests, and there have been a large number of press reports that the CIA has sent back to Libya its Libyan asset to head up the Libyan rebellion. 

In my opinion, what this is about is to eliminate China from the Mediterranean. China has extensive energy investments and construction investments in Libya. They are looking to Africa as a future energy source. 

The US is countering this by organizing the United States African Command (USAC), which Qaddafi refused to join. So that's the second reason for the Americans to want Qaddafi out.

And the third reason is that Libya controls part of the Mediterranean coast and it's not in American hands. 

Press TV: Who are the revolutionaries. The US say they don't know who they're dealing with, but considering the CIA is on the ground in contact with revolutionaries - Who are the people under whom Libya will function in any post-Qaddafi era? 

Roberts: Whether or not Libya functions under “revolutionaries” depends if the CIA wins - we don't know that yet. As you said earlier, the UN resolution puts constraints on what the European and American forces can achieve in Libya. They can have a no fly zone, but they are not supposed to be in there fighting together with the rebels. 

But of course the CIA is. So we do have these violations of the UN resolution. If NATO, which is now the cover for the “world community,” succeeds in overthrowing Qaddafi, the next target will be Syria. Syria has already been demonized. 

Why are they targeting Syria? - Because the Russians have a very large naval base in Syria. And it gives the Russian navy a presence in the Mediterranean; the US and NATO do not want that. If there is success in overthrowing Qaddafi, Syria is next. 

Already, they are blaming Iran for Syria and Libya. Iran is a major target because it is an independent state that is not a puppet of the Western colonialists. 

Press TV: With regards to the expansionist agenda of the West, when the UN mandate on Libya was debated in the UN Security Council, Russia did not veto it. Surely Russia must see this expansionist policy of the US, France and Britain.

Roberts: Yes they must see that; and the same for China. It's a greater threat to China because it has 50 major investment projects in eastern Libya. So the question is why did Russia and China abstain rather than veto and block? We don't know the answer. 

Possibly the countries are thinking to let the Americans get further over- extended, or they may not have wanted to confront the US with a military or diplomatic position and have an onslaught of Western propaganda against them. We don't know the reasons, but we know they did abstain because they did not agree with the policy, and they continue to criticize it. 

Press TV: A sizeable portion of Qaddafi's assets have been frozen in the US as well as some other countries. We also know that the Libyan revolutionaries have set up a central bank and that they have started limited production of oil and they are dealing with American and other Western firms. It begs the question that we've never seen something like this happen in the middle of a revolution. Don't you find that bizarre? 

Roberts: Yes it's very bizarre and very suggestive. It brings back the fact of all the reports that the CIA is the originator of this so-called revolt and protest and is fomenting it and controlling it in a way that excludes China from its own Libyan oil investments. 

In my opinion, what is going on is comparable to what the US and Britain did to Japan in the 1930s. When they cut Japan off from oil, from rubber, from minerals; that was the origin of World War II in the pacific. And now the Americans and the British are doing the same thing to China. 

The difference is that China has nuclear weapons and it also has a stronger economy than do the Americans. And so the Americans are taking a very high risk not only with themselves, but with the rest of the world. The entire world is now at stake on American over-reach; American hubris - the drive for American hegemony over the world is driving the rest of the world into a World War.

Press TV: In the context of America's expansionist policies, how far do you think the US will stretch beyond the UN mandate? Are we going to see boots on the ground? 

Roberts: Most likely - unless they can find some way of defeating Qaddafi without that. Ever since we've had Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and now Obama, what we've learned is law means nothing to the executive branch in the US. They don't obey our own laws; they don't obey international law; they violate all the civil liberties and buried the principal of habeas corpus, no crime without intent, and the ability for a defendant to be legally represented. 

They don't pay any attention to law so they're not going to pay any attention to the UN. The UN is an American puppet organization and Washington will use it as a cover. So, yes, if they cannot run Qaddafi out they will put troops on the ground - that's why we have the French and the British involved. We're using the French elsewhere in Africa also; we use the British in Afghanistan - they're puppets. 

These countries are not independent. Sarkozy doesn't report to the French people - he reports to Washington. The British PM doesn't report to the English people he reports to Washington. These are puppet rulers of an empire; they have nothing to do with their own people and we put them in office.

Press TV: So these other countries would welcome having NATO troops on the ground? 

Roberts: Of course. They are in the CIAs pocket. It's a CIA operation, not a legitimate protest of the Libyan people. It's an armed rebellion that has no support in the capital city. It's taking place in the east where the oil is and is directed at China. 

Press TV: Where do you see the situation headed? There seems to be a rift between NATO countries with Britain and France wanting to increase the momentum of these air strikes, but the US saying no, there is no need. 

Roberts: The rift is not real. The rift is just part of the cover, just part of the propaganda. Qaddafi has been ruling for 40 years - he goes back to Gamal Abdel Nasser (before Anwar Sadat) who wanted to give independence to Egypt. 

He (Qaddafi) was never before called a brutal dictator that has to be removed. No other president has ever said Qaddafi has to go. Not even Ronald Reagan who actually bombed Qaddafi's compound. But all of a sudden he has to go. Why? 

Because he's blocking the US African Command, he controls part of the Mediterranean and he has let China in to find its energy needs for the future. Washington is trying to cripple its main rival, China, by denying China energy. That's what this is really about; a reaction by the US to China’s penetration of Africa. 

If the US was concerned about humanitarianism, it wouldn't be killing all these people in Afghanistan and Pakistan with their drones and military strikes. Almost always it's civilians that are killed. And the US is reluctant to issue apologies about any of it. They say we thought we were killing Taliban or some other made-up enemy. 

Press TV: Who will benefit from all of this other than the US? The other countries that comply with US wishes - What do they stand to gain from this? 

Roberts: We are only talking about NATO countries, the American puppet states. Britain, France, Italy, Germany, all belong to the American empire. We've had troops stationed in Germany since 1945. You're talking about 66 years of American occupation of Germany. The Americans have military bases in Italy - how is that an independent country? France was somewhat independent until Washington put Sarkozy in power. So they all do what they're told. 

Washington wants to rule Russia, China, Iran, and Africa, all of South America. Washington wants hegemony over the world. That's what the word hegemony means. And Washington will pursue it at all costs.

Libya: Italy rejects calls to join ground attack operations

William Hague and Secretary
General Anders Fogh Rasmussen
at the NATO mee

Telegraph

Splits in the international coalition on Libya widened on Friday as Italy flatly rejected calls to contribute air power to the mission targeting Colonel Muammar Gaddafi's forces.

Amid growing fears of a military stalemate in Libya, Britain and France have exhorted other Nato members including Italy, Spain and the Netherlands, to provide warplanes and other "strike assets".

Only Canada, Norway, Denmark and Belgium are supporting the Anglo-French ground attack operations, which Nato estimates is at least ten warplanes short of what is required.

William Hague, the Foreign Secretary, claimed to be making "a bit of progress", and Anders Fogh Rasmussen, the Nato Secretary General said he was "hopeful" that other members will do more. But a Nato ministers' meeting in Berlin ended on Friday night without any firm commitments of new deployments.

Spain on Thursday rejected requests to do more, and yesterday Italy said it would not go beyond allowing Britain and France to use Italian airbases.

"We have done enough," said Silvio Berlusconi, the Italian prime minister. "An engagement that goes beyond our current commitment would not make sense."

Mr Berlusconi was speaking after it emerged that ENI, the Italian oil company, was preparing to ship oil from Gaddafi-controlled terminals for the first time since air strikes began.

Germany meanwhile warned that the military action ran a "big risk" that a crippled, divided Libya would become a failed state on the doorstep of Europe. "The fact is there is a big risk that this military operation gets stuck in the sand somewhere and at the end of the day Libya turns into a failing state and Gaddafi is still in control of quite a chunk of that failing state," said Werner Hoyer, the deputy foreign minister. "That would be a nightmare."

Canada also said that it could not consider increasing its military contribution to the mission until after its general election next month.

There was also growing criticism on Friday over signals that Britain, France and the US would continue the military mission until Col Gaddafi was ousted.
That has led to allegations that the allies are overstepping the authority of United Nations Security Council resolution 1973, which last month authorised military action to protect Libyan civilians from Col Gaddafi's forces.

Sergei Lavrov, the Russian foreign minister, attended the Nato summit and warned that the current military strikes "in many cases go beyond the framework set by the Security Council".

Nato's refusal to target the Libyan leadership directly has allowed Col Gaddafi, his family and lieutenants to re-emerge in public after disappearing in the early weeks of the bombing campaign.
In a display of defiance, Aisha Gaddafi, the dictator's only daughter, took to the ramparts of a house destroyed by America's 1986 air raid to scorn the pressure that is being put on the Libyan regime. "Leave our skies with your bombs," she said. "You want to kill my father, pretending to protect civilians. To speak of Gaddafi's resignation is a humiliation for all Libyans."

Gaddafi's forces yesterday launched more heavy bombardments on the rebel-held western town of Misurata, now in its seventh week of siege.

Nearly 1,200 Asian and African migrants, many in bad shape after weeks with little food or water, left the town on Friday on a ship for Benghazi, the rebel capital.

Germany and Italy demands participation of Quartet in Investigations

Palestinian Telegraph

World, June 9, (Pal Telegraph) Germany and Italy announced that they want the international Quartet of mediators in the Middle East to participate to achieve "a transparent and impartial" investigation in the Israeli raid on an aid convoy which was heading to Gaza.

German Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle and his Italian counterpart Franco Frattini, both assured after a meeting in Berlin, that they want to an international investigation and Frattini added that "its for Israel’s own benefit" forsuch an inquiry to be held.

France and Britain also called on Israel to accept an international investigation into the incident. As for Israel, an Israeli official said yesterday that Israel is consulting with the United States and other countries on the form of investigation to be conducted in the Israeli raid on an aid convoy of ships destined to Gaza.

Israel has rejected a United Nations proposal on holding an international investigation, but expressed willingness to let foreign experts or observers participate in the investigation to be conducted on how to deal with six ships headed for the besieged Gaza Strip on May 31. Secretary-General of the UN, Ban Ki-moon, has called for the formation of a neutral international commission of inquiry in the crime committed against the ships and passengers of the fleet of freedom which left 9 of the Turks who were on board killed and many others injured.

Arrest of 13 CIA Agents Sought in Spain

Harper's

By Scott Horton

Prosecutors attached to the Audiencia Nacional in Madrid are reportedly requesting that Judge Ismael Moreno issue an order for the arrest of thirteen CIA agents involved in an extraordinary rendition operation from 2004, the newspaper El País reports this afternoon, citing sources within the court.

The case relates to Khaled El-Masri, a greengrocer from Neu-Ulm, Germany, seized by the United States as a result of mistaken identity while he was on vacation in the former Yugoslavia. El-Masri was placed on a CIA-chartered jet that arrived in Macedonia from Palma de Majorca in January 2004, en route ultimately to Afghanistan. It appears that Majorca was used regularly as a refueling and temporary sheltering point for the CIA, with the knowledge of the prior conservative government. While held in the notorious CIA prison known as the Salt Pit, El-Masri was apparently tortured during extensive interrogations before intelligence officers realized that they had seized the wrong man. The Washington Post reported that CIA agents, fearing the consequences of releasing him, argued for his continued detention and in fact held him for at least several weeks after his release had been ordered. Condoleezza Rice, then national security advisor to President Bush, intervened and directed his release. El-Masri’s CIA abductors entered Spanish territory using forged British passports, according to the prosecutors. They are seeking James Fairing, Jason Franklin, Michael Grady, Lyle Edgar Lumsen III, Eric Matthew Fain, Charles Goldman Bryson, Kirk James Bird, Walter Richard Greensbore, Patricia O’Riley, Jane Payne, James O’Hale, John Richard Deckard and Héctor Lorenzo, according to information provided by the Spanish Guardia Civil. The case is also under investigation in Germany.

The Spanish prosecutors have been closely studying the prosecution in Italy of 23 American agents in connection with another extraordinary rendition, involving an Egyptian cleric known as Abu Omar, who was seized off the streets of Milan and taken to Egypt, where he was tortured. The Italian proceedings occurred in absentia after the Americans fled to avoid arrest. The trial resulted in the conviction of 23 Americans, 21 of them intelligence operatives. A criminal proceeding relating to the kidnapping and torture of El-Masri is also underway in Germany.