All candidates are neo-imperial candidates - Wall Street proxy Jibril of "National Forces Alliance" presumed winner.
by Tony Cartalucci
July 9, 2012 - Ideally the West would like to install "liberal" pro-globalist candidates into power in each of the nations it has destabilized and destroyed during its premeditated, engineered "Arab Spring." In the case of Egypt where Mohammed ElBaradei was sufficiently exposed and his presidential aspirations effectively derailed, the West's Muslim Brotherhood proxies made for a viable second option.
In Libya, a similar scenario has unfolded with two tiers of Western proxies poised to take power - pro-globalist technocrats like US-educated Mahmoud Jibril (Gibril) Elwarfally's National Forces Alliance, and of course NATO's terrorist proxies within the Muslim Brotherhood along with Al Qaeda-linked Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) warlords like Abdul Hakim Belhaj.
In Egypt where relative economic and social stability returned after the brief chaos and violence of the early 2011 protests, the alternative media was able to sufficiently expose and disrupt "liberal" candidate ElBaradei. In Libya, the nation has been plunged into nationwide lawlessness, violence, and sweeping genocide by sectarian extremists, tribal confrontations, and militant opportunists. The people of Libya have been too busy defending themselves and desperately fighting for their own immediate survival to function as a nation-state, let alone scrutinize candidates politically before the farcical Western-hyped elections.
In other words, no matter who wins the so-called elections in war-torn Libya, the West has ensured all the candidates are loyal proxies, and will most assuredly have one of these proxies in place to guide Libya according to its own agenda rather than that of the Libyan people.
The New York Times has already proclaimed in its article, " Party Led by Pro-Western Official Claims Lead in Libya," that Jibril's party is the likely winner. Readers might recall that in May of 2011, Jibril had made a pilgrimage back to the United States where he received his higher education and spent years teaching in Pittsburgh, to speak before the corporate-financier funded Brookings Institution (Brookings page here) about turning Libya into a "lake" to develop the skills of Africans to serve the needs of markets in the European Union.
Jibril will serve not as an "elected representative" of the Libyan people, but as a technocratic proxy implementing not only the West's designs for Libya, but carrying out its role in recolonizing and exploiting both the vast populations and resources of the entire African continent. Jibril, or whoever the West finally installs into power will not only carry out this agenda, they will do so under the guise of a "democratic mandate." While impressionable and/or duplicitous people the world over applaud Libya's elections, they are but the most superficial attempt to spin NATO's genocidal destruction of one of the most developed nations in Africa.
And despite these elections, Libya will remain largely lawless and a terrorist safe-haven by design so that it may continue serving its purpose as a weapons, fighter, and cash hub for NATO militant proxies throughout the region, particularly verses Syria.
Libya's "transitional government" led by Western big oil representative Abdurrahim el-Keib had already played a significant role in carrying out Western designs against other geopolitical targets throughout North Africa and the Middle East, including Mali and Syria where Libya has shipped both weapons and fighters to augment NATO-backed terrorists seeking to overthrow these targeted governments. Libya under el-Keib has also lent significant political support to the West's Arab World agenda. Along with the government of Tunisia - led at the time by US funded "activist" Moncef Marzouki, Libya had withdrawn recognition of Syria's government. The US-installed Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt has likewise backed Western designs throughout the region, most recently backing US calls for intervention in Syria.
What the uninformed public believes it is seeing is a transition to "democracy" across the Arab World and each of these nations joining together to ensure such a transition in remaining "dictatorships" takes place. It might be mistakenly believed then that the United States is merely "reacting" to this unfolding paradigm in a supportive capacity.
What has happened in reality is that the so-called "Arab Spring" was planned by the West as early as 2008 with activists literally flown to the United States to receive training, funding, and equipment with which to return to their home countries and begin a campaign of coordinated destabilization. It was under this cover of seemingly legitimate peaceful protesting that more violent elements, organized as early as 2007 or even earlier (as was the case in Libya), began violently overthrowing regimes targeted, according to US Army General Wesley Clark, as early as 1991, with a complete list documented as early as 2001. This list, provided during General Clark's talk at the Commonwealth Club of California, October 3, 2007, included seven nations slated by the Pentagon for destabilization and destruction: Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya Somalia, Sudan, and Iran.
Libya's elections are therefore an absolute farce in the wake of a premeditated Western military campaign aimed at the entire Arab World - the elections a motion gone through to couch the creation of a Western client regime within the perceived legitimacy elections may grant it in the minds of both Libyans and global public opinion.
by Tony Cartalucci
July 9, 2012 - Ideally the West would like to install "liberal" pro-globalist candidates into power in each of the nations it has destabilized and destroyed during its premeditated, engineered "Arab Spring." In the case of Egypt where Mohammed ElBaradei was sufficiently exposed and his presidential aspirations effectively derailed, the West's Muslim Brotherhood proxies made for a viable second option.
In Libya, a similar scenario has unfolded with two tiers of Western proxies poised to take power - pro-globalist technocrats like US-educated Mahmoud Jibril (Gibril) Elwarfally's National Forces Alliance, and of course NATO's terrorist proxies within the Muslim Brotherhood along with Al Qaeda-linked Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) warlords like Abdul Hakim Belhaj.
In Egypt where relative economic and social stability returned after the brief chaos and violence of the early 2011 protests, the alternative media was able to sufficiently expose and disrupt "liberal" candidate ElBaradei. In Libya, the nation has been plunged into nationwide lawlessness, violence, and sweeping genocide by sectarian extremists, tribal confrontations, and militant opportunists. The people of Libya have been too busy defending themselves and desperately fighting for their own immediate survival to function as a nation-state, let alone scrutinize candidates politically before the farcical Western-hyped elections.
In other words, no matter who wins the so-called elections in war-torn Libya, the West has ensured all the candidates are loyal proxies, and will most assuredly have one of these proxies in place to guide Libya according to its own agenda rather than that of the Libyan people.
Image: Mahmoud Elwarfally Jibril, self-proclaimed leader of the Libyan “Transitional National Council” speaks before the corporate-financier funded Brookings Institution in 2011, moderated by former CIA analyst Kenneth Pollack. Jibril maintained that the rebellion against Qaddafi was a natural product of the “globalizational process.” He plans on turning Libya into a "lake" within which the population of all of Africa can be marshaled to meet Europe's markets - or in other words, recolonized.
....
The New York Times has already proclaimed in its article, " Party Led by Pro-Western Official Claims Lead in Libya," that Jibril's party is the likely winner. Readers might recall that in May of 2011, Jibril had made a pilgrimage back to the United States where he received his higher education and spent years teaching in Pittsburgh, to speak before the corporate-financier funded Brookings Institution (Brookings page here) about turning Libya into a "lake" to develop the skills of Africans to serve the needs of markets in the European Union.
Jibril will serve not as an "elected representative" of the Libyan people, but as a technocratic proxy implementing not only the West's designs for Libya, but carrying out its role in recolonizing and exploiting both the vast populations and resources of the entire African continent. Jibril, or whoever the West finally installs into power will not only carry out this agenda, they will do so under the guise of a "democratic mandate." While impressionable and/or duplicitous people the world over applaud Libya's elections, they are but the most superficial attempt to spin NATO's genocidal destruction of one of the most developed nations in Africa.
And despite these elections, Libya will remain largely lawless and a terrorist safe-haven by design so that it may continue serving its purpose as a weapons, fighter, and cash hub for NATO militant proxies throughout the region, particularly verses Syria.
Libya's "transitional government" led by Western big oil representative Abdurrahim el-Keib had already played a significant role in carrying out Western designs against other geopolitical targets throughout North Africa and the Middle East, including Mali and Syria where Libya has shipped both weapons and fighters to augment NATO-backed terrorists seeking to overthrow these targeted governments. Libya under el-Keib has also lent significant political support to the West's Arab World agenda. Along with the government of Tunisia - led at the time by US funded "activist" Moncef Marzouki, Libya had withdrawn recognition of Syria's government. The US-installed Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt has likewise backed Western designs throughout the region, most recently backing US calls for intervention in Syria.
What the uninformed public believes it is seeing is a transition to "democracy" across the Arab World and each of these nations joining together to ensure such a transition in remaining "dictatorships" takes place. It might be mistakenly believed then that the United States is merely "reacting" to this unfolding paradigm in a supportive capacity.
What has happened in reality is that the so-called "Arab Spring" was planned by the West as early as 2008 with activists literally flown to the United States to receive training, funding, and equipment with which to return to their home countries and begin a campaign of coordinated destabilization. It was under this cover of seemingly legitimate peaceful protesting that more violent elements, organized as early as 2007 or even earlier (as was the case in Libya), began violently overthrowing regimes targeted, according to US Army General Wesley Clark, as early as 1991, with a complete list documented as early as 2001. This list, provided during General Clark's talk at the Commonwealth Club of California, October 3, 2007, included seven nations slated by the Pentagon for destabilization and destruction: Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya Somalia, Sudan, and Iran.
Libya's elections are therefore an absolute farce in the wake of a premeditated Western military campaign aimed at the entire Arab World - the elections a motion gone through to couch the creation of a Western client regime within the perceived legitimacy elections may grant it in the minds of both Libyans and global public opinion.