Saturday, September 29, 2012

The House of Saud: British-Programmed Killer of Muslims

This article appears in the September 28, 2012 issue of Executive Intelligence Review.
The House of Saud:
British-Programmed Killer of Muslims
by Ramtanu Maitra
Editor's Note: As the wave of what is purported to be spontaneous Islamic rage erupts around the world, it is crucial for all policymakers and citizens to face the ugly truth about the crucial actor in this program of planned chaos and mayhem: Saudi Arabia. It is Saudi Arabia, as a kept subsidiary of the British monarchy, which is spending billions and trillions of dollars internationally, in furtherance of the monarchy's agenda of religious warfare and terrorism. The hate propaganda, the weapons, the bombs are bought and paid for by Saudi front groups and that nation's own emissaries, just as was the Sept. 11, 2001 assault on the United States.
As Lyndon LaRouche has emphasized, the Saudi monarchy has got to be held accountable.
In the piece that follows, Ramtanu Maitra provides a solid profile, with some shocking particulars, of the British-Saudi terror operations of the last decades.

Sept. 21—A recent article, " 'Al-Qaeda' American Spring," in the Syrian news daily
 Tahwra al Wehda, pointed out that al-Qaeda, always having been financed by the Wahhabi regime of the House of Saud, is now being transported from Yemen and the Pakistan-Afghanistan borders to Syria, to fight against Bashar al-Assad's regime. What the Syrian daily did not include is that the transportation of these terrorists to Syria has the blessings of the Obama and Cameron administrations.
The article identified the role of the Saudi intelligence chief, Prince Bandar bin Sultan, in this new move:
"The House of Saud has, exclusively, provided the financial, political, religious and media support for al-Qaeda. This support is emboldened specifically with the new political role of Bandar bin Sultan after becoming the head of Saudi intelligence."
Over many decades, particularly since 9/11, the Saudi role on behalf of the British, the Zionists, and a degenerated U.S. leadership, has been to kill Muslims—both Sunnis and Shias. This is the only way the House of Saud, highly unstable within Saudi Arabia, could continue its decrepit leadership in that country. In other words, by serving the interests of the colonial and neo-colonial forces, the House of Saud survives.
Britain + House of Saud = al-Qaeda
There is no dearth of evidence that al-Qaeda, the mighty Sunni terrorist group, whose prime target is the Shias, was and is financed by the House of Saud at the behest of Britain, if not the United States and Israel. The propaganda machine, Western in particular, has tried in vain to perpetuate the myth that the recently eliminated creator of al-Qaeda, Osama bin Laden, was an enemy of the House of Saud, since he was banned from entering Saudi Arabia after he had attacked U.S. installations.
But the real story is altogether different. Osama's al-Qaeda had always been financed by the House of Saud and its lackeys within Saudi Arabia. It was for this reason that, following the 9/11 attacks that killed more nearly 3,000 individuals, Washington finally moved in to close down some of the bank accounts that the Saudis used to finance Osama's terrorist outfit. But those closures were more show than substance. The House of Saud has many other ways to get money to the terrorists and they are using them today, whether Washington's security people admit it or not.
Osama had long been a British asset, to say the least. In 1999, the French Parliament commissioned a thorough investigation of global money-laundering. After publishing reports on Liechtenstein, Monaco, and Switzerland, it produced a report titled The City of London, Gibraltar and the Crown Dependencies: Offshore Centers and Havens for Dirty Money, with an addendum titled "The Economic Environment of Osama bin Laden." The report concluded that up to 40 British banks, companies, and individuals were associated with bin Laden's network, including organizations in London, Oxford, Cheltenham, Cambridge, and Leeds.
In introducing the report, Arnaud Montebourg, a French Member of Parliament, concluded:
"Tony Blair, and his government, preaches around the world against terrorism. He would be well advised to preach to his own bankers and oblige them to go after dirty money.... Even the Swiss co-operate more than the English."[1]
The British protection of Osama began long before 1999, however. Late in 2001, Saudi-based journalist Adam Robinson, in his book Bin Laden: Behind the Mask of the Terrorist, drew from interviews with Osama's immediate family, and gave a detailed account of bin Laden's three months in England at the beginning of 1994.
Bin Laden's London Base
Upon arriving, bin Laden bought a house on, or near, Harrow Road in the Wembley area of London, Robinson wrote. He paid cash, and used an intermediary as the named owner. Bin Laden's most important task was setting up his organization, the Advice and Reformation Committee (ARC), to disperse his press releases and to receive donations. After bin Laden left, a fellow Saudi "dissident," Khaled al-Fawwaz, ran the ARC from London, keeping in touch with bin Laden by phone, and distributing his statements to the many Arabic newspapers based in London.
Bin Laden also established relations with two London residents who were crucial to crafting his image as an international spokesman for, and mastermind of, the militant Islamist movement over the years. The first was Abdel Bari Atwan, the editor of the Arabic newspaper Al-Quds Al-Arabi, and the other was radical cleric and Muslim Brother Sheikh Omar Bakri Muhammad, who called himself "the voice of Osama bin Laden" and directed the extremist Islamic Liberation Partyand the al-Muhajiroun organization out of his London mosque.[2]
Omar Bakri Mohammad was also instrumental in developing another Blair-protected terrorist group,Hizb ut-Tahrir (HuT), in Britain. HuT later worked hand-in-glove with al-Qaeda-affiliated terrorists to establish a strong presence in the "stan" countries of Central Asia (Tajikistan,
Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Kazakstan, and Turkmenistan), and in northern Lebanon. The HuT, like the House of Saud, preaches Wahhabism and trains Wahhabi-indoctrinated terrorist killers. A number of "stan" countries have banned the HuT, but it still lurks in the shadows and is growing, posing an increasing threat to Russia's southern flank and fulfilling the British, if not American, geopolitical objective.
What tasks did Osama have to carry out for the British to secure the privilege of Britain's empire crowd? In order to understand that, one has to look at the British policies toward oil-rich Libya, which were put in motion soon after the defeated Soviet military left Afghanistan in 1989. The British empire crowd had been looking longingly to gain control of Libya, and its oil, for years. But, Libyan leader Muammar Qaddafi was stable and was keeping most of his countrymen content.
The Attempt To Assasinate Qaddafi
In 1996, British saw an opening, when a Libyan military intelligence officer approached Britain's foreign intelligence service, MI6, with a plan to overthrow Qaddafi, according to former MI5 officer and whistle-blower David Shayler.[3] The Libyan, codenamed "Tunworth," proposed establishing links with the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG), an organization formed in Afghanistan in 1990 from around 500 Libyan jihadists then fighting the Soviet-backed government.
One former senior member of the LIFG, Norman Benotman, who first went to Afghanistan as a 22-year-old in 1989, later said in an interview that during the Afghan War, his mujahideen commander was Jalaludin Haqqani, and that he and fellow militants had benefitted from British training programs: "We trained in all types of guerrilla warfare. We trained on weapons, tactics, enemy engagement techniques and survival in hostile environments. All weapons training was with live ammunition, which was available everywhere. Indeed, there were a number of casualties during these training sessions. There were ex-military people amongst the Mujahideen, but no formal state forces participated. We were also trained by the elite units of the Mujahideen who had themselves been trained by Pakistani Special Forces, the CIA and the SAS.... We had our own specially designed manuals, but we also made extensive use of manuals from the American and British military."
Nota bene: Benotman is an associate of Tony Blair. When the British people clamored to get the Hizb ut-Tahrir banned, Blair, using taxpayers' money, created the Quillam Foundation, whose supposed "job" was to identify terrorist groups functioning within Britain. The foundation was stocked with "former" terrorists, who were deployed to work for the MI6. As a result, HuT continues to grow within, and beyond, Britain.
In addition, Benotman's mujahideen commander,Jalaluddin Haqqani, is none but the founder of the Haqqani group which is killing American soldiers in Afghanistan, while allegedly sheltering itself within Pakistan's Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA). Haqqani has had a long history with Saudi, American, and Pakistani intelligence agencies. During the Afghanistan jihad against the Soviets, he was one of the favored commanders and received millions of dollars from the West and the Saudis, as well as Stinger missiles, rocket-propelled grenades, mortars, explosives, and tanks. He became close with Osama bin Laden during the jihad, and after the Taliban took control, he served as minister of tribal affairs in its government. According to some, it is Jalaluddin Haqqani who introduced suicide bombing in the Afghanistan-Pakistan region.
The attempt to assassinate Qaddafi by the British, using Osama's people, failed. Annie Machon, Shayler's partner and a former MI5 officer, writes that, by the time MI6 paid the money to Tunworth, bin Laden's organization was already known to be responsible for the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, and MI5 had set up G9C, "a section dedicated to the task of defeating bin Laden and his affiliates." This is significant in light of Britain's toleration of bin Laden's London base—the Advice and Reformation Committee—which would not be closed down for another two and a half years.
U.S. intelligence sources later told the Mail on Sunday newspaper that MI6 had indeed been behind the assassination plot and had turned to the LIFG's leader, Abu Abdullah Sadiq, who was living in London. The head of the assassination team was reported as being the Libya-basedAbdal Muhaymeen, a veteran of the Afghan resistance, and thus possibly trained by MI6 or the CIA. A smattering of other media investigations confirmed the plot, while a BBC film documentary broadcast in August 1998 reported that the Conservative government ministers then in charge of MI6 gave no authorization for the operation, and that it was solely the work of MI6 officers.[4]
One other fact that needs to be stated here is Washington's implicit involvement, by looking the other way while their "best allies" across the Atlantic were using the "most wanted" terrorists. The Libyan al-Qaeda cell that the MI6 and Blair were using included Anas al-Liby, who remains on the U.S. government's most wanted list, with a reward of $25 million for his capture.
But this despicable and morbid episode does not end here. Two French intelligence experts, Guillaume Dasquié and Jean-Charles Brisard, the latter an advisor to French President Jacques Chirac, revealed in their book Forbidden Truth: U.S.-Taliban Secret Oil Diplomacy and the Failed Hunt for bin Laden (2002), that the first Interpol arrest warrant for bin Laden was issued by Libya in March 1998. British and U.S. intelligence agencies buried the fact that the arrest warrant had come from Libya and played down the threat. Five months after the warrant was issued, al-Qaeda killed more than 200 people in the truck bombings of U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania.[5]
The House of Saud, Zionism, and the British
The importance of the House of Saud to the British cannot be understood fully without looking back at the historical role that King Abdulaziz bin Saud (Ibn Saud) played in helping Britain and France to divide up the Ottoman Empire by means of the 1916 Sykes-Picot agreement, and also in bringing the Zionists into Palestine. When the British Empire picked up Ibn Saud, leader of the Wahhabi sect, to become the "Keeper of Two Holy Mosques," it was in a way the fulfillment of Empire's plan. The Hashemite dynasty, which claims the bloodline of the Prophet Muhammad, was the strongest traditional Arab force, but its back was broken when Ibn Saud threw them out of Mecca and Medina. In their "pity," the British then put the Hashemites Abdallah bin al-Hussein and Faisal bin Hussein in place as rulers in Jordan (1921) and Iraq, respectively. Faisal was briefly proclaimed King of Syria (1920), and ended up becoming King of Iraq (1921).
In the subsequent period, both Iraq and Syria chucked out these religious leaders and, to the chagrin of the British Empire, were taken over by sectarian political parties. It is no surprise then that, with the help of the Americans, the British were deeply involved in efforts to overthrow both these leaders and bring them under indirect control—such as now exists in Bahrain—of the House of Saud. It should be noted that when Ibn Saud was just a desert-based Bedouin, with no wealth to boast of, it was the British Empire that funded his conquest of all of Arabia.
On the other hand, by picking up a desert-roaming Bedouin and putting him in charge of "the Two Holy Mosques," Britain bought itself a horde of serfs. And Ibn Saud delivered quickly, by welcoming the Zionists to the Arab world! The British groundwork for determining the destiny of Ibn Saud, and the House—or rather the Tent—of Saud, was done by the intrepid British intelligence officer Gertrude Bell. In 1919, at the Paris Conference ending World War I, Bell argued for the establishment of independent Arab emirates for the area previously covered by the Ottoman Empire. The Arab delegation, which was actually under Bell's control, was led by Faisal Saeed al-Ismaily, a Bedouin Sunni steeped in the orthodox version of the religion, born in Taif (now, Saudi Arabia), the third son of the Grand Sharif of Mecca.
On Jan. 3, 1919, Faisal and Chaim Weizmann, president of the World Zionist Organization, signed the Faisal-Weizmann Agreement for Arab-Jewish cooperation, in which Faisal conditionally accepted the Balfour Declaration, based on the fulfillment of British wartime promises of development of a Jewish homeland in Palestine, on which subject he made the following statement: 
"We Arabs ... look with the deepest sympathy on the Zionist movement. Our deputation here in Paris is fully acquainted with the proposals submitted yesterday by the Zionist Organization to the Peace Conference, and we regard them as moderate and proper. We will do our best, in so far as we are concerned, to help them through; we will wish the Jews a most hearty welcome home.... I look forward, and my people with me look forward, to a future in which we will help you and you will help us, so that the countries in which we are mutually interested may once again take their places in the community of the civilized people of the world."
Even today, the House of Saud's allegiance to the Zionists who have massively displaced the Palestinian population, remains intact. That is why the House of Saud deploys its Wahhabi-indoctrinated terrorists against the Shia Muslims as their prime target. While it is true that the orthodox Sunnis, and only the orthodox Sunnis of extreme variety, do not accept the Shias as Muslims (and hence they ostensibly do not violate killing of Muslims which Prophet Muhammad had strongly warned against), there could be another reason why the Shias are targeted. To begin with, Britain has had its problems with Iran, a civilization that would not kowtow to the British Empire the way the Bedouins did. Secondly, after Iraq was virtually decimated by the Bush-Cheney-Obama crowd following 9/11, Iran has remained the only active backer of the Palestinians.
New Role for the House of Saud
In recent years, the House of Saud has been assigned a new "job" by Britain, and the so-called 1% in the United States who have trashed the American republic and adopted the Empire's method of making money. These Americans have greatly benfitted by becoming Britain's partner in reaping the proceeds of drug money that is laundered by offshore banks, most of which are located in former British colonies. Since such "benefits" cannot be accrued without yielding to what the Empire-promoters demand, Washington, under Bush and Obama, has become as much a partner of the despotic colonial practices as Thatcher, Blair, and Cameron.
The Taliban project goes back a few decades. After the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan in December 1979, the "free world" got together to push the Red Army back and smack the Russian bear. Money flowed into Afghanistan from the West and the Persian Gulf, with the intent of protecting the sovereignty of Afghanistan, preserving Islam, and crippling the Communists.
During the 1980s, Saudi-funded radical Pakistani madrassas (seminaries) had pumped out thousands of Afghan foot soldiers for the U.S.- and Saudi-funded jihad against the Soviets. They also helped bind the independent-minded Pushtun tribesmen closely to the Pakistani government for the first time in history, easing the acute insecurity that Pakistan had felt with respect to Afghanistan and the disputed border.
It is hardly a secret that rich Saudis, including those running the government, have used their considerable oil wealth to spread political and ideological influence throughout the world. One need look no further than the close-knit relationship between the House of Saud and the Bush family to understand the Saudis' powerful reach across the globe. In Muslim countries, though, its presence is more explicitly ideological. Indeed, since 9/11, it has become increasingly clear that Saudi money frequently makes its way into the hands of Islamic extremists.
As Afghanistan plunged into civil war in the 1990s, the Saudis began funding new madrassas in Pakistan's Pushtun-majority areas, near the Afghan border, as well as in the port city of Karachi and in rural Punjab. The Pakistani Army saw the large number of madrassa-trained jihadis as an asset for its covert support of the Taliban in Afghanistan, as well as its proxy war with India in Kashmir.
While in Pakistan's North West Frontier Province (NWFP), bordering Afghanistan, and the gateway to the famed Khyber Pass, madrassas supplied both Afghan refugees and Pakistanis as cannon fodder for the Taliban, the Binori madrassa and others associated with it formed the base for Deobandi groups (not too distant from the Wahhabi), such as Harkat-ul-Mujahideen andJaish-e-Mohammed, which sought to do the Pakistan Army's bidding in Kashmir. The manyAhle-Hadith seminaries supplied Salafi (Wahhabi) groups, such as the Lashkar-e-Taiba. Arab sheikhs funded madrassas in the Rahimyar Khan area of rural Punjab, which formed the backbone of hard-core anti-Shi'ite jihadi groups like the Sipah-e-Sahaba, and its even more militant offshoot, the Lashkar-e-Jhangvi.
All these groups shared training camps and other facilities, under the aegis of Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI).
The Saudi and Gulf petrodollars encouraged a Wahhabi jihad-centered curriculum at the madrassas. Prominent madrassas included theDarul Uloom Haqqania at Akora Khattak in the NWFP and the Binori madrassa in Karachi. The Haqqania boasts almost the entire Taliban leadership among its alumni, including top leaderMullah Omar, while the Binori madrassa, whose leader Mufti Shamzai was assassinated, was once talked about as a possible hiding place of Osama bin Laden; it is also reportedly the place where bin Laden met Mullah Omar to form the al-Qaeda-Taliban partnership.
The House of Saud worked hand-in-glove with al-Qaeda in setting up these madrassas. For instance, Saudi Arabia's Prince Turki bin Faisal, who had taken over the General Intelligence Directorate (GID), Riyadh's main intelligence service, in 1977 and headed it until 2001, had known bin Laden since 1978. Bin Laden became one of the linchpins of the GID's funding policy toward the ISI and anti-Soviet warfare in Afghanistan, and he met with Turki several times in Islamabad. Many years afterward, in 1998, when bin Laden had already become engaged in an anti-American crusade, Turki allegedly requested his extradition from Taliban leader Mullah Omar, but was not successful.
Madrassas: Poison Them Young
In 2007, former U.S. Ambassador to Costa Rica Curtin Winsor, in an article for Global Politician,[6] pointed out that while Saudi extremists remain the vanguard of Islamic theofascism around the world, the growth potential for this ideology lies outside the Kingdom.
"The Saudis have spent at least $87 billion propagating Wahhabism abroad during the past two decades, and the scale of financing is believed to have increased in the past two years as oil prices have skyrocketed. The bulk of this funding goes to the construction and operating expenses of mosques, madrassas, and other religious institutions that preach Wahhabism. It also supports the training of imams; domination of mass media and publishing outlets; distribution of Wahhabi textbooks and other literature; and endowments to universities (in exchange for influence over the appointment of Islamic scholars). By comparison, the Communist Party of the USSR and its Comintern spent just over $7 billion propagating its ideology worldwide between 1921 and 1991."
From an astonishing cable published by the Pakistani newspaper Dawn,[7] however, it would seem that significant sums of Saudi money are fostering religious radicalism in previously moderate regions of Pakistan. The cable, dating from late 2008, paints an unsettling picture of wealth's powerful influence in those underdeveloped areas of Central Asia in need of the most attention. Bryan Hunt, then-principal officer at the U.S. consulate in Lahore, reported a string of troubling findings from his forays into southern Punjab, where he "was repeatedly told that a sophisticated jihadi recruitment network had been developed in the Multan, Bahawalpur, and Dera Ghazi Khan Divisions."
The cable describes ways in which recruiters exploit families with multiple children, particularly those facing severe financial difficulties in light of inflation, poor crop yields, and growing unemployment in southern and western Punjab. Often these families are identified and initially approached/assisted by ostensibly "charitable" organizations including Jamaat-ud-Dawa (a front for the terrorist organization Lashkar-e-Taiba), the Al-Khidmat Foundation (linked to the religious political party Jamaat-e-Islami), or Jaish-e-Mohammad (a charitable front for the designated foreign terrorist organization of the same name).
Wahhabi proselytizing is not limited to the Islamic world. The Saudis have financed the growth of thousands of Wahhabi mosques, madrassas, and other religious institutions in many non-Islamic countries. Wahhabi penetration is deepest in the social welfare states of Western Europe, where chronically high unemployment has created large pools of able-bodied young Muslim men who have "become permanent wards of the state at the cost of their basic human dignity," according to the cable.
The House of Saud's madrassa project is very active in South Asia as well. According to 2004 reports, the Saudi Embassy in New Delhi was pushing India's Human Resource Development Ministry and Minorities Commission to set up new madrassas in India, and the Saudi Royal Family has cleared plans to construct 4,500 madrassas in India, Bangladesh, Nepal, and Sri Lanka at a cost of $35 million, to promote "modern and liberal education with Islamic values."
[3] "Britain, Qadafi and the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group," Aug. 17, 2011, an extract from Mark Curtis, Secret Affairs: Britain's Collusion with Radical Islam (London: Serpent's Tale, 2010.
[4] Ibid.
[5] Martin Bright, "MI6 'halted bid to arrest bin Laden'," The Observer, Nov. 10, 2002.
[6] Amb. Curtin Winsor, Ph.D., "Saudi Arabia, Wahhabism and the Spread of Sunni Theofascism," Global Politician, Oct. 22, 2007.
[7] Michael Busch, "WikiLeaks: Saudi-Financed Madrassas More Widespread in Pakistan Than Thought, Dawn, May 26, 2011.

Wednesday, September 26, 2012

Killing of US ambassador in Libya; Qaddafi’s “Green Resistance”

Fresh Light on the killing of US ambassador in Libya; Qaddafi's "Green Resistance" did it. 

To begin with Western leaders and subservient corporate media and its poodles around the world had accepted that the Green Resistance of the supporters of the Libyan leader Muammar Qaddafi had carried out the operation (he was lynched and sodomised by the criminals and terrorists brought in by US-NATO-GCC mafia with their pretensions of culture and civilisation –Has anyone been even charged!). This narrative of the killing by the Green Resistance, when it was being proclaimed that it was all hunky-dory in Libya had to be changed. Therefore all kinds of new narratives are propounded ; blame the extremist groups brought into Libya by democracy spreading US led West ( as in Afghanistan, Iraq and elsewhere ) and those icons of democracy and freedom in GCC, led by Saudi Arabia and Qatar. 

When US appointed Paul Bremmer its Viceroy to rule Iraq in July 2003, taking account of the history of Iraqi people I had written that resistance will emerge against the US occupation as it had against the British occupation in early 20th century after the world war one. This was the time when Neocons controlled blank slate George Bush was prematurely celebrating 'Mission accomplished'. 

Iraq's history already written   15 July, 2003

 The West and its media pundits were comparing Iraq to defeated Japan and Germany after World War II and how democracy was introduced there ( but why the GIs there since 1945 ). In January 2 004 I again reminded that there would be resistance in Iraq as there was in Turkey after the first world war and in Algeria after second world war.

Occupation case studies: Algeria and Turkey 7 January, 2004

So there should be little doubt that local resistances by various tribes in Libya has emerged and will strengthen. The patriotic Libyans have in Omar Al-Mukhtār, a historical icon. Omar (1862 – September 16, 1931), was born in the small village near Tobruk in Libya. Beginning in 1912, he, for nearly twenty years, organized and led patriotic resistance to Italian colonization of Libya. The Italians captured and hanged him in 1931. 

Please read on 

K.Gajendra Singh 26 September , 2012 .

Libya's Green Resistance Did It... And NATO Powers Are Covering Up
Global Research, September 20, 2012
The NATO powers and the bureaucrats they installed in Libya want you to think that all 5.6 million Libyans are happy that NATO and its proxy terrorists destroyed Libya, whose standard of living had been Africa's highest under Gaddafi.
They want you to think that NATO brought "freedom and democracy" to Libya, not chaos and death.
They want you to think that there is no Green Resistance to the NATO imperialists or NATO's Islamist allies in Benghazi.
In reality, the Resistance has been increasingly active since shortly after the murder of Muammar Gaddafi in October 2011, as will be shown below. They strike any NATO target they can, and they execute key Libyans who betrayed Gaddafi and sided with NATO. The Benghazi incident was merely their latest blow against what they see as NATO's illegal occupation of their country.
Everyone in Libya knows about the Green Resistance, whose members are called "Tahloob" (Arabic for "Gaddafi loyalists"). The denial only happens outside of Libya, by the NATO powers and their dutiful Western mainstream media.
Because of this denial, and because most of the world's people have forgotten about Libya, the internet is filled with blind guesses, unfounded claims, and ridiculous counterclaims regarding the Benghazi incident last week in which US Ambassador Christopher Stevens and at least three other American personnel were killed. And the NATO lie factory is operating at full blast.
The Obama regime says "protesters" irate over an anti-Islam video did it.
The NATO-installed bureaucrats in Libya say that "foreign extremists" did it.
US Congressmen say "Al Qaeda did it". So does CNN, plus disinformation web sites like Alex Jones' Prison Planet, which denounces any reference to the Green Resistance as "absurd". (1)
Media outlets, such as the UK Guardian, say "an organized terror network did it".
Turkey's government says "Syria's Assad did it".
Israel says "Hezbollah did it".
The Sunni monarchs of the Gulf Cooperation Council oil sheikdoms say "Iran did it".
Even reputable alternative media writers and progressive bloggers have attributed the attack to "the Benghazi Islamists", and that this is "blowback from imperialism".
Wikileaks says the attack happened because the US had backed Britain's threat to storm the Ecuadorian embassy in London and remove Julian Assange. (2)
Some media outlets claim that "Al Qaeda" carried out the attack in revenge for the supposed death in Pakistan (by US drone strike on 4 June 2012) of Libyan-born Abu Yahya Al Libi (aka Hassan Mohammed Qaid) who was supposedly a key aide to Osama bin Laden, and was supposedly the "number two man" in Al Qaeda.
This claim is nonsense, since Al Qaeda has been a group of mercenaries employed by Washington and London since 1980. President Reagan called them "heroes" and "freedom fighters". The US and Britain sends its Al Qaeda mercenaries to the Balkans, Libya, Syria, Chechnya, Somalia, Sudan, and other places that NATO wants to infiltrate, destroy or destabilize.
NATO pays Ayman Al Zawahiri, the so-called leader of the Al Qaeda mercenaries, to advance
NATO imperialism by recording videos and audio-tapes; over 60 of them so far. Zawahiri repeatedly called for the death of Gaddafi, and now he repeatedly calls for the death of Syria's President Bashar Al Assad. He also calls for Pakistanis to support the Taliban, in order to make the world think the Taliban still exists. He sometimes records in English, and his true identity and whereabouts are a NATO secret. On 11 September 2012, in commemoration of 9/11, he released a video that eulogized Abu Yahya Al Libi, the one supposedly killed by a US drone in June. This "eulogy" had nothing to do with the Benghazi incident, which happened later that night on Tuesday 11 September.
Some claim that Salafists carried out the fatal attack on the US premises. This is more nonsense, since Salafists are NATO allies. Salafists and Wahhabists connote a strict, literalist, and puritanical approach to Islam. They are mainly associated with Saudi Arabia's feudal style of Islam, and they were allied with NATO against Gaddafi. Now they are allied with NATO against Assad, Iran, Hezbollah, and Shiites generally.
An example of Salafists in Libya is the Ansar Al Sharia – a blanket term for various militias that want to apply strict Sharia law in Libya. Its members are pro-NATO and anti-Green Resistance. They had no reason to attack the US government site in Benghazi which had been instrumental in galvanizing the Islamist insurgency to topple the Gaddafi government, beginning at least from March 2011 and under the supervision of the late Christopher Stevens. Stevens was Washington's point man in Benghazi and is known to have cultivated strong ties with the Islamists.
In short, it does not make sense that such Benghazi contacts would have wanted or have been motivated to kill their American paymaster.
The most obvious explanation is that cadres – the Green Resistance – loyal to Gaddafi and in opposition to the NATO-imposed regime carried out the attack. NATO and its Libyan quislings don't want to admit this subversive reality. The fact of a resistance – a potent and growing resistance at that – has to be denied, erased from the record.
It was a mere coincidence that the Benghazi attack happened on the eleventh anniversary of 9/11. The Green Resistance was angry that Abdullah Al Senoussi (Gaddafi's chief of intelligence) had been arrested upon his arrival at Nouakchott airport in Mauritania on 17 March 2012. Then, six days before the Benghazi attack, Mauritania extradited Senoussi to Libya for trial by the NATO-installed bureaucrats.
One day before the Benghazi attack, the NATO puppets put two senior Gaddafi loyalists on trial, accusing them of wasting public money by paying $2.7 billion to families of people killed in the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland. The two Gaddafi loyalists are Abdul Ati Al Obeidi (who had been Gaddafi's Prime Minister, Foreign Minister, and Head of State) and Mohammed Zwai (former Secretary General of the General People's Congress – that is, head of the legislature under Gaddafi).
Also, Baghdadi Ali Mahmudi had been Secretary of the General People's Committee (that is, Prime Minister) under Gaddafi, but escaped from Tripoli on 21 August 2011 as NATO-backed terrorists swept into the city. Mahmudi was arrested in Tunisia for illegal border entry and jailed for six months until his charges were overturned on appeal. On 24 June 2012, Tunisia's Prime Minister Hamadi Jebali (acting on NATO orders) suddenly had Mahmudi re-arrested and sent back to the NATO puppets in Tripoli, who promptly imprisoned Mahmudi.
Tunisia's Prime Minister Hamadi Jebali is pro-NATO, and a friend of American hawkish senators McCain and Lieberman. His re-arrest and extradition of Mahmudi angered Tunisian President Moncef Marzouki, who denounced the extradition as illegal, and it also enraged the Libyan Green Resistance. (3)
As for US Ambassador Christopher Stevens, he had promoted Libya's destruction, having arrived in Benghazi in April 2011 for that purpose, and remained there throughout the NATO seven-month aerial bombardment of Libya. His job was to coordinate the NATO-backed terrorists.
After Libya was destroyed, Stevens had used a Tripoli hotel as his base, since the Green Resistance had burned down the US embassy in the capital, Tripoli. When the Resistance tried to kill him with a car bomb outside the hotel, Stevens moved to the villas in Benghazi, a city in the east of the country whose inhabitants tend to be pro-US and which has long been a hotbed of Islamist jihadis, many of them furnishing the ranks of NATO's Afghan Mujahideen in the 1980s and later Al Qaeda. (4)
That was over a year ago. (Stevens formally became Obama's ambassador to Libya in May 2012.)
Stevens was outgoing, and had so underestimated the Green Resistance that he enjoyed jogging in the streets of Benghazi and elsewhere in Libya. (5)
Everyone knew that he and his American staff were present. One figure among the pro-NATO terrorists, Ahmed Al Abbar, says of Stevens: "He was loved by everybody [that is, in Benghazi]". (6)
Stevens' popularity with the Benghazi traitors added to the fury of the Green Resistance when they eventually attacked the US site in Benghazi.
Thus, contrary to claims by Western media outlets such as the British Independent, there were no "major security breeches," and no "mystery" about the attack. All such claims are red herrings designed to distract from the reality of the Green Resistance.
The morning after the Benghazi attack, on 12 September, the NATO puppets unwittingly admitted the truth about the "Tahloob" (Green Resistance), and whined that NATO was not doing enough to help crush it. Libyan Deputy Interior Minister Wanis Al Sharif admitted this in a Benghazi news conference, which was later broadcast on Al Jazeera television. (7) (8) (29)
Libya's Prime Minister Abdurrahim El-Keib also admitted it, as did Libya's President Mohammed El-Megarif, as well as Ali Aujali, Libya's Ambassador to Washington, plus Ibrahim Dabbashi, Libya's ambassador to the UN. All of them said that Gaddafi loyalists had attacked the US site in Benghazi. They would quickly change their change tune under pressure from their NATO masters.
Back on 24 August 2012, Time magazine had noted that Gaddafi "still commands silent admiration in many parts of Libya". The article quoted President El-Magariaf as saying: "We know that Gaddafi loyalists are behind these bombings [since the overthrow of Gaddafi]. In the last few months, the security services have intensified their campaign against Bani Walid and Tarhuna." (9)
Bani Walid is a loyalist stronghold whose people held key positions in Gaddafi's security services. It was also the last city outside of Gaddafi's birthplace of Sirte to fall to NATO-backed terrorists on 23 January 2012. Magariaf is from Benghazi, and spent 30 years in the US being groomed for the time when NATO would destroy Libya. On 9 August 2012, NATO installed him as Libya's head of state after an "election". Magariaf is allied with the Muslim Brotherhood, which is aligned with NATO.
The initial admissions of the truth about the Green Resistance were made on the morning after the attack. Within hours, however, all top Libyan officials, acting under NATO orders, changed their tune, merely calling the attackers "foreign extremists". Magariaf, the president installed by NATO, went to Benghazi three days after the attack, and declared that "Al Qaeda did it". (10)
One bureaucrat who would not adopt the NATO spin was Prime Minister Abdurrahim El-Keib, who continued to insist that Gaddafi loyalists were the perpetrators. Therefore, NATO dismissed him as Libya's prime minister, and replaced him with Mustafa Abushagur, the day after the Benghazi incident. Abushagur had lived most of his life in the USA, and had always been an enemy of Gaddafi. Like so many other US-installed bureaucrats, he had returned to Benghazi in May 2011 during the NATO-instigated insurgency.
Some alternative news outlets acknowledge the truth about the Green Resistance, for example, the Inter Press News Service, which is a non-profit outlet.
IPS spoke with armed Gaddafi loyalists who vowed that they will step up their fight. Government sources alternately claim the perpetrators are former Gaddafi loyalists or Islamists. Further confusion arises from a government clampdown on the dissemination of information in the local media, and by Libyan security forces preventing foreign journalists from covering the scenes of attacks first-hand, or taking pictures. (11)
The Libyan bureaucrats' clampdown on media information is understandable, since they want to hamper solidarity with the Green Resistance.
Regarding the Benghazi incident, the mass denial begins with basic facts. For example, most people refer to "the US consulate," when in reality the US site in Benghazi was not an embassy or a consulate, or even a "compound". It was a collection of villas (that is, a gated community) privately owned by one Mohammad Al Bishari, who was leasing the villas to US State Department personnel.
Collectively the villas were what the US State Department calls an "interim facility". It had a level of security known as "simple lock and key," meaning it had no bulletproof glass, reinforced doors, US Marines, or other features common to embassies and consulates. (In Mexico, for example, Washington has an embassy and 22 consulates, but in Libya the US government had only a single embassy in Tripoli – and then, after the NATO bombardment campaign, used the Benghazi villas.)
The corporate media falsely use the term "US consulate" to make it seem that "terrorists attacked US sovereignty". This justifies the "war on terror," plus the past destruction of Libya.
Furthermore, the Obama regime calls the privately owned group of villas a "compound" in order to make it seem that the (non-existent) "protesters" brazenly stormed a fortress similar to the massive US embassy complex in Baghdad.
The White House claims that protesters against that anti-Muslim video "spontaneously" attacked the so-called "consulate." In reality there were no protesters anywhere in Benghazi at the time of the attack. When Fox News questioned US officials about this, the officials admitted the truth. (13)
Nonetheless, the Obama administration/regime continues to insist that "protesters did it". This lie not only conceals the Green Resistance; it also makes Muslims all seem irrational and blood-lusting, thereby justifying imperialist aggression (that is, the "war on terror").
The absence of protesters was confirmed by one of the eight Libyans guarding the private group of villas used by Ambassador Stevens and his staff. The eyewitness, aged 27, is being treated in a hospital for five shrapnel wounds in one leg, and two bullet wounds in the other. He asked that his name be withheld, and that the hospital not be identified, for fear that "militants" (that is, the Green Resistance) would track him down and kill him.
Of the eight Libyan security guards, the eyewitness and four others had been hired by a British firm. The remaining three were members of Libya's 17th of February Brigade, a group of pro-NATO terrorists formed at the start of the NATO campaign to destroy Gaddafi and Libyan society.
In an interview with McClatchy news service last Thursday (13 September 2012) the eyewitness said there were no protesters at all.
"The Americans would have left if there had been protesters, but there wasn't a single ant. The area was totally quiet until about 9:35 pm, when as many as 125 men attacked with machine guns, grenades, RPGs, and anti-aircraft weapons. They threw grenades into the villas, wounding me and knocking me down. Then they stormed through the facility's main gate, moving from villa to villa."
That does not sound like a "spontaneous protest" against a blasphemous B-movie that suddenly appeared on the internet, as the White House and others claim; rather, it was a sharply executed military strike that must have been planned meticulously well in advance.
The eyewitness managed to escape by telling one of the attackers that he was only a gardener in the gated community. His account is consistent with that of Mohammad Al Bishari, who owns the villas, and was leasing them to the US government. Bishari gave his own account on 12 September, the day after the attack. (12)
Ambassador Stevens was overcome by "severe asphyxia" (smoke inhalation), and was still alive after the attack. Pro-US Libyans in Benghazi carried him to the Benghazi Medical center, where he died later in the night. (14)
NATO destroyed Libya and reduced its people to poverty and violence. In the post-destruction chaos, there are family feuds and inter-militia rivalries. There are long-standing disputes over land, plus long-standing friction between Arabs and Berbers.
However, we shall focus on Resistance attacks against NATO targets, and Resistance assassinations of Libyan figures that betrayed Gaddafi and sided with NATO. The following are only some of the "scores".
On 18 March 2012, in the Tripoli neighborhood of Abu Salim (a pro-Gaddafi stronghold) local members of the Green Resistance had a shoot-out with a pro-NATO militia group from Zintan led by one Mohammed El-Rebay. (Zintan is a province in Libya's western mountains.) The Resistance managed to kill one of the Zintan terrorists, who had been using a Tripoli school as their base. (15)
In April 2012, the Resistance detonated a roadside bomb beside a UN convoy that included Ian Martin, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon's Special Representative for Libya. (16)
On 29 April 2012, the lifeless body of Shukri Ghanem, Gaddafi's former oil minister, was found floating in the River Danube. In May 2011, Ghanem had joined NATO, and went off to reside in London and then Vienna. (17)
On 2 May 2012, the Green Resistance claimed responsibility for assassinating General Albarrani Shkal, a former military governor of Tripoli who had demobilized the 38,000 men of his guard and opened the gates of Tripoli to foreign troops during Operation Mermaid Dawn, the sacking of Tripoli that began on 20 August 2011. (Tripoli's nickname is "The Mermaid".) (18)
On 15 May 2012, Khaled Abu Salah, a candidate for the Constituent Assembly controlled by NATO, was assassinated near the oasis town of Ubari in southwest Libya. (19)
On 22 May 2012, a rocket-propelled grenade targeted the headquarters of the International Committee of the Red Cross in Benghazi, but caused only structural damage to the premises. The ICRC is headquartered in Geneva, and its foreign offices are often used as cover by Western intelligence agencies, such as MI6 or the CIA.
On 26 May 2012, Mukhtar Fernana, head of the Military Council for the Western Region, survived an assassination attempt.
On 5 June 2012, the Resistance detonated a bomb in front of the US-operated building in Tripoli, damaging its gates.
On 11 June 2012, in Benghazi's al-Rabha neighborhood, the Resistance fired an RPG at a convoy that carried British Ambassador Dominic Asquith, wounding two of his bodyguards. (20)
Back in July 2011, Abdel-Fattah Younis, the former Qaddafi loyalist turned "rebel" military commander, was assassinated. On 22 June 2012, the judge investigating the death of Younis was himself assassinated in Benghazi.
On 28 July 2012, Suleiman Buzraidah was killed in a drive-by shooting while he was en route to a Benghazi mosque. Buzraidah had been a military intelligence official under Gaddafi, but betrayed him to join the NATO-backed terrorists. (21)
On 29 July 2012, Khalifa Belqasim Haftar narrowly survived an assassination attempt. Formerly one of Gaddafi's army commanders, in 1988 he betrayed Gaddafi and lived for 23 years under US government protection near CIA headquarters in Virginia. He returned to Libya during the NATO-led insurgency, hoping that after Gaddafi's death, he would be made commander-in-chief of the Libyan military (controlled by NATO). However, he had to settle for third place in the hierarchy, and was given the rank of Lt. General before the Resistance caught up with him.
Last month was an especially active four weeks for the Resistance. Security buildings and hotels in Benghazi were rocked by bomb attacks and attempted attacks. Foreign diplomatic staff and embassies were targeted. US embassy staff in Tripoli escaped an attempted carjacking.
On 10 August 2012, eight Resistance members escaped from the Al Fornaj prison in Tripoli after a coordinated attack. Gunmen in pickup trucks outside the prison shot at security guards, while prisoners inside set sections of the prison on fire and managed to overpower a number of guards. This was the third Resistance attack on the prison since the murder of Gaddafi. (22)
On 18 August 2012, the Green Resistance detonated a car bomb outside the Four Seasons Hotel on Omar Al Mukhtar Street in Tripoli. The target was a vehicle being used by Benghazi security officials (installed by NATO) who were staying at the hotel. (22)
Afterwards, the NATO-installed bureaucrats sent heavily armed soldiers to prevent photographs being taken, and to forbid journalists from entering the area, so that word of the Green Resistance would not get out. A Libyan interior ministry official refused to comment further. (22)
The following day, the Resistance set off more car bombs in Tripoli. One bomb was near the administrative offices of the Interior Ministry (controlled by the NATO powers). Two other car bombs exploded minutes later near the former headquarters of a women's police academy, which NATO now uses for interrogation and detentions. (The latter two bombs killed two passersby.)
The next day in Benghazi (20 August 2012) Resistance members tossed a bomb into the car of Abdel Hamid Refaii, the first secretary of the Egyptian Embassy. This was outside Refaii's house. However, the assassination bid failed.
The day after that, the then Libyan Prime Minister Abdurrahim El-Keib condemned the Green Resistance in a televised speech, saying: "Desperate and malicious forces among the supporters of the former regime are trying to create tension, send Libya backwards to violence, and sabotage the country's political process." (23)
Tripoli's security chief, Col Mahmoud Sherif, said Gaddafi loyalists were responsible for the spate of violent attacks. He ordered the arrest of 32 suspected Resistance members for interrogation. (24)
Indeed, the police in Tripoli (who now work for the NATO powers) are constantly occupied with defusing car bombs set by the Resistance. (25)
After the Resistance bombing of the former headquarters of a women's police academy, the NATO puppets sent soldiers to raid a farm where Resistance members were holed up. Several of the Gaddafi loyalists were killed.
One of the members who survived was alleged to have set up sleeper cells in Libya and to have been criss-crossing the border with Tunisia from where he and several comrades were smuggling weapons into Libya for the Resistance. (26)
On 23 August 2012, Abdelmenom Al Hur, official spokesperson for the Supreme Security Committee, installed by NATO, held a press conference in which he admitted that Gaddafi loyalists had penetrated many official security units. He said that a whole barracks full of heavy armaments was under the control of a pro-Gaddafi cell that he called the Awfia Brigade. (The group's members call themselves the "Martyr Gaddafi Brigade".) The same Resistance brigade had briefly occupied Tripoli International Airport back in June 2012.
After the attack that killed Ambassador Stevens on 11 September 2012, the Resistance managed to shut down the Benina airport in Benghazi, which the US military was using as a drone base. (27)
With the Resistance firing at US drones, the airport had become unsafe. A Turkish Afriqiyah Airlines flight with 121 people onboard was forced to turn back to Istanbul. (28)
The foregoing is only a partial list of Resistance activity over the past year, which has dramatically increased during the last three months, reaching a crescendo in August, and leading to the death of US Ambassador Christopher Stevens last week.
The NATO powers had shifted their focus to destroying Syria, and on continuing their preparations to destroy Iran, while letting their Tripoli bureaucrats handle the Green Resistance in Libya. Now, however, the NATO powers realize that Libya is far from subjugated and that they are being seriously tasked with crushing the Resistance before it gains critical mass.
Marines, drones, and warships have been sent to quash the Gaddafi loyalists – but how to find them? Even the FBI declined to "investigate" the latest attack in Benghazi, realizing that it would be pointless.
Libya presents Washington with another Afghan nightmare – only perhaps worse. If US drones start blasting Libyans, and the US military rounds up tens of thousands of suspected loyalists, then the Resistance can only become stronger. Of Libya's 5.6 million people, only one in 10 (that is, the population of the eastern city of Benghazi) welcomed the NATO bondage and destruction of their country.
Meanwhile, the NATO powers do not want the Western public to realize any of this awkward truth. They want you to think that all Libyans are happy under NATO's "liberation" with their Islamist terrorist proxies. Some 50,000 Libyans lost their lives due to NATO's bombing and ground campaign during 2011. And for what? Only for a Resistance to rise up to illustrate to the world that Libyans had their country stolen from them by NATO powers in a criminal war of aggression.
The more the Libyan Green Resistance gains strength and challenges the NATO-imposed regime, the more clear it becomes that the Western governments and their media lied in their pretexts of "responsibility to protect (R2P)" human rights and democracy. Recall that these were the pretexts invoked by the NATO powers to justify setting up No-Fly Zones in Libya in March 2011. (The same pretexts are again being reiterated with regard to Syria.)
But, as the growing Resistance illustrates, the Western powers did not "liberate" Libya; they invaded a sovereign country and killed massively to execute their real, criminal agenda of regime change and theft of oil resources. Now the people of Libya are resisting this criminal conquest. And that damning truth has to be expunged at all costs.
Before the Benghazi incident, the corporate media had occasionally mentioned Gaddafi loyalists. After the incident, all such mention has suddenly ceased. The media say that "extremists" attacked the US site in Benghazi. Or "Al Qaeda" or "Islamists" or "terrorists," or "protesters" – anyone but the Resistance.
Not true. The Green Resistance lives, and furthermore it is only getting started.
Mark Robertson is a political analyst based in Mexico City
Finian Cunningham is a freelance journalist based in East Africa
Copyright © 2012 Global Research

Even if there comes a time when you do not hear my voice, do not give up. Do not despair. Do not stop fighting for your freedom until you have victory! ~ Muammar Al-Qadhafi
September 23, 2012
Written by Alexandra Valiente
"Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it." (George Santayana, 1863-1952.)
A meticulous piecing together of the events in Benghazi leading to the deaths of U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens, three colleagues and either seven or ten Libyan personnel, on 11th September, has been presented by Mark Robertson and Finian Cunningham, cutting through "fog", hypocrisies and misinformation. (i.)
The events in Benghazi have been presented in the media as a spontaneous uprising caused by rage at the sewer level "film", The Innocence of Muslims. However, quoting one of the surviving, but badly injured Libyan personnel, Robertson and Cunningham note his words:
"The Americans would have left if there had been protesters, but there wasn't a single 'anti.' The area was totally quiet until about 9:35 pm, when as many as 125 men attacked with machine guns, grenades, RPGs, and anti-aircraft weapons. They threw grenades into the villas, wounding me and knocking me down. Then they stormed through the facility's main gate, moving from villa to villa."
The article also points out that this was not an official US Consulate, but a bunch of rented dwellings with little reinforcement of doors and windows as would usually be the case. That soundly negates the claim that "U.S. sovereignty" was attacked,  justifying in U.S. Administration eyes, as ever, more bombs from the air and "boots on the ground."
Paying tribute to Ambassador Stevens the day after his death (ii) Hillary Clinton, it has to be said, probably explained the reason for his murder to the world: "In the early days of the Libyan revolution, I asked Chris to be our envoy to the rebel opposition. He arrived on a cargo ship in the port of Benghazi and began building our relationship with Libya's revolutionaries."
President Obama in tribute confirmed: "With characteristic skill …  and resolve, he built partnerships with Libyan revolutionaries … I think both Secretary Clinton and I relied deeply on his knowledge of the situation on the ground there. " With hindsight a tragic lack of judgement all round. And what happened to that Nobel Peace Prize?
The President concluded: "Today we mourn four more Americans who represent the very best of the United States of America." (iii)
Thus, with US government backing, the Ambassador plotted with a bunch of insurgents and terrorists the overthrow of yet another sovereign government. "The world needs more Chris Stevens", said Madam Clinton. "He would be remembered as a hero by many nations … in a noble and necessary" mission, she concluded.
Clearly there are Libyans in their ruined country who do not see it quite that way. As Iraq of course, they will be "dead enders", as Afghanistan "rogue elements", and another illegal, ill judged, finally to be defeated, U.S. quagmire looms.
However, in the immediate, consider some questions. Assuming quotes from the survivor are correct, unprotected buildings, including that or those housing the Ambassador and American colleagues, were attacked with hand grenades, rocket propelled grenades and anti-aircraft weapons, then buildings were stormed and set ablaze.
Hand grenades blow bits off people, or blow them to bits depending on the distance of the body from the impact. RPGs destroy tanks,  let alone people, anti-aircraft weapons are designed to damage and bring down aircraft. It seems however, the Ambassador did miraculously survive, some of the gruesome pictures appear authentic. What remained of the others?
Allowing for the chaos of the immediate aftermath of the attack, the varying accounts are multiple: the Ambassador was killed in the building; he was rescued and driven to hospital, the car shot through the window; he was rescued and carried on shoulders to hospital. On arrival he was breathing but suffering from severe smoke inhalation; he was already dead – much later, he was noted to be covered in soot.
U.S. planes finally land to collect the bodies. There seems to be no independent verification, no pictures from to be found of this heroic rescue.. Four coffins were subsequently shown at Andrews Air Force Base, their arrival marked by a "solemn ceremony."
Then, near silence. The Ambassador, given the words of the President and his Secretary of State was surely to be given a State funeral. His colleagues' passing also likely to be attended by Washington officials.
A search finally revealed that the funeral for Glen Doherty, the former Navy SEAL, turned contractor, was held in Winchester, Mass., on Wednesday 19th September. There is no mention of any official Washington Presence.(iv)
The following day the funeral of his colleague, serving SEAL Tyrone Woods, was held in San Diego, with little national coverage. (v)
In a nation which lets its grief hang out as no other, oddly, daily searches find no funeral announcements for Ambassador Stevens or U.S. Air Force veteran Sean Smith, with ten years as an information management officer in what has been since 2009, Hillary Clinton's State Department.
It is also impossible to forget those pictures claimed to be of the unconscious or dead Ambassador being dragged through Benghazi.
With two deceased shrouded in silence, it is worth noting Germany's Der Algemeiner's coverage of 16th September: "The blogo-sphere is buzzing with a shocking unconfirmed report, originating from Lebanese based news website Tayyar, that Christopher Stevens, the US Ambassador to Libya was …. dragged through the streets before being murdered on 11th September.
The report originally cited the AFP news agency, however after AFP issued a denial saying: "That report falsely quoted our news agency", the website apologized, but said its still stands behind the report."
The report (vi) is in fact more graphic and explicit, claiming the attack mirrored that on Colonel Qaddafi, whereabouts of whose remains have never been discovered.
It is still early days, but it is impossible not to reflect on stories recounted by Reginald Keys- who challenged Tony Blair in the 2005 UK election – who lost a son in Iraq, and of others bereaved, of coffins coming back to the UK encasing stones, not bodies, or a single limb, which the grieving were asked to identify. Both the U.S. and U.K. have been found to have buried remains in land-fill, rather than return them to relatives. (e.g. vii.)
If there are, as one bereaved American father stated of his son: "throw away soldiers", perhaps there are also "throw away" Ambassadors and their staff when things go wrong.
The U.S. Administration has also failed to acknowledge the Libyans they employed who died. When General Taguba was investigating the horrors of Abu Ghraib he was told by an official that the murdered, tortured and abused: "were only Iraqis." Were these allies of Ambassador Stevens: "only Libyans"?
In a terrible irony, the air waves have been noting that the last U.S. Ambassador to be murdered, was in 1979. The circumstances are never mentioned. He was Adolph Dubbs, appointed U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan in 1978.
On 14th February 1979 he was kidnapped by four armed militia posing as police. He was held in room 117 of the Kabul Hotel (now the Kabul Serena Hotel.) All negotiations failed and he was killed an exchange of gunfire hours later.
The wretched victims in Benghazi are of another U.S. folly. Ironically, Qaddafi's take over of Libya, which at the time of his murder had the highest standard of living in Africa, was bloodless. America's aspirations of democracy, liberation and freedom (read asset stripping) involves unending rivers of blood. Theirs and the decimated "liberated."
There are countless questions surrounding another terrible incident.
And lessons are never learned.

|  _`\;,_               come ride with me
| (*)/ (*)
 Bike4Peace Across the USA                    

Silence is the deadliest weapon of mass destruction.

"The biggest weapon in the hands of the oppressors is the minds of the oppressed." Steve Biko

"Make your spirit flexible, and nothing will ever bend you out of shape."  Wisdom by Taro Gold