For some time now it has become apparent that NATO was getting desperate. First, the persistent loss of territory by the criminal gangs of foreign terrorists they back, then the disarray within the TNC (a gang of opportunists), then the flagrant breach of international law, the war crimes, targeting the Libyan water supply and electricity grid...
It is by now patently obvious that NATO serves as the military wing of the invisible lobbies controlling the banking, energy, telecommunications, drugs and weapons lobbies which in fact dictate the policies of the majority of western states and all of its member states' foreign policies, without ever having been elected. It is also becoming increasingly obvious that NATO serves as a club to further the interests not only of these lobbies but also any politician in trouble, who is a member of the club.
Why, when Bill Clinton got into a pickle with his penis and a dress in the Oval Office, lo and behold, NATO supported the horrific Albanian terrorists (KLA/UÇK) and created the Kosovo problem (drugs lobby). Now, leapfrogging the foreign policy disaster which was the criminal invasion of Iraq (energy lobby, weapons lobby, telecoms lobby), we have the protagonists the UK Prime Minister Cameron (who after one year has destroyed his own country with his pig-headed arrogance), the hugely unpopular French President, Nicolas Sarkozy and that failed one-timer insult to the international community, Obomber, the one who received the Nobel Peace Prize and turned against Africa.
So, with three losers like these, it is hardly surprising the NATO campaign got off to a non-starter. After all, they had armed and aided a bunch of terrorists, most of whom are not even Libyan (100,000 Egyptian terrorists have been sent to the fray, many of them to their deaths) and they got it wrong. To be successful, a rebellion has to have popular support, it has to have the support of the youth, and it has to start in the heart of the capital city.
If it starts on the frontiers, already secured, and in cities such as Benghazi which has historic and endemic separatist quarrels with the capital Tripoli, suspicions are stirred up (as were mine). It is not very difficult for a journalist of 30 plus years, such as myself, with a history of contacts in Africa, these days armed with the most powerful weapon of all, the Internet, and books full of contacts, to network and discover quite how wrong NATO was on this account.
I was already aware of the enormous contribution of Colonel Gaddafi to Africa and to the building of institutions which freed this continent from the yolk of submission to the lobbies which control NATO. So with Africa behind him, and the bulk of his people behind him (estimates range from 80% to 98%, more than Cameron, Sarkozy and Obama combined) it was hardly surprising that NATO's campaign was yet again going to be an utter disaster.
And ladies and gentlemen, here we have it: frustration turning into desperation and rather than admit defeat with honour, these cowards turn on the population. First of all, the no-fly zone morphed into an illegal campaign backing terrorists to the extent that the Libyan Armed Forces know very well when the terrorists will attack because the bell they ring is a NATO bombing campaign strafing houses. Secondly, the attacks on civilian facilities, just as they did in Iraq, bombing the Libyan water supply system and the electricity grids to, in the words of a NATO commander, "Break the population". Now if that isn't evil, I don't know what is.
And finally, the media lies as the terrorists face a humiliating defeat and go back to their own countries (has NATO paid them yet? And with whose money?). More media lies, which is hardly surprising because this is how the campaign began: false flag events created UNSC resolutions 1970 and 1973 (2011) because Colonel Gaddafi's forces were not attacking civilians, they were defending civilians from terrorists. Google up Libya+rebels+photo. Are these civilians?
And today we have SKY News claiming that the "rebels" (what "rebel" comes from a foreign country? Or are they "civilians"? In which case, what "civilian" carries heavy automatic weapons?) have made multiple gains in Al-Brega, in Al-Zawiya, in Surman, in Sebrata and in Gharyan.
In a word, BULLSHIT! The NATO/terrorists are nowhere near al-Bregah, they are trying desperately to retain control of Benghazi and Tobruk; in the west, (Al-Zawiya, Surman, Sebrata and Gharyan) the NATO/terrorist forces are divided into two groups but the population of these towns and cities is armed and does not want this scourge in their midst, after the carnage they created last time (raping, beheading, killing children and so on). Therefore when they appear on the outskirts, they are chased from house to house like rats.
Two parting shots. As Cameron, Obama and Sarkozy cut public spending at home, has anyone an idea of just how much of their taxpayers' money they are wasting on bombing civilians and murdering children in Libya? No? Then it is better they do not know, for the author of this piece does not want to start any more problems than these countries already have.
Oh, and erm...Misratah has been taken 100% by the Libyan Armed Forces. In future any NATO vessel entering the port will have Libyan Government authority to dock or else we will see if the fish in the Mediterranean Sea really do like frogs and their Anglo-Saxon masters.
A final note: There is overwhelming evidence that the NATO countries involved in this terrorist campaign have broken every rule in the book, including clear violation of international law. These have been compiled in a report and are being sent to the competent international forums ahead of the UNSC vote in September. And those responsible are to be held accountable.
If international law exists, whether or not the clique of "leaders" of the international community wishes to uphold it or not, they number a few hundred, collectively. The world population is several billion strong.