ها قد حضرت أمريكا

LIBYAN REBELS CURRENTLY LISTED BY U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT AS TERRORISTS



03
Saturday
Sep 2011



Posted by Alexandra in AL-QAEDA, CIA, INSURGENT CRIMES, LIBYA, LIFG, NATO, NTC HENCHMEN, TERRORISM, THE FACTS


≈ Leave a Comment












NATO leaders are guilty under US code of providing material support to terrorists.


Tony Cartalucci. Land Destroyer Report

“Whoever knowingly provides material support or resources to a
foreign terrorist organization, or attempts or conspires to do so, shall
be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 15 years, or
both, and, if the death of any person results, shall be imprisoned for
any term of years or for life. To violate this paragraph, a person must
have knowledge that the organization is a designated terrorist
organization (as defined in subsection (g)(6)), that the organization
has engaged or engages in terrorist activity (as defined in section
212(a)(3)(B) of the Immigration and Nationality Act), or that the
organization has engaged or engages in terrorism (as defined in section
140(d)(2) of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 1988
and 1989).” -USC § 2339B. Providing material support or resources to designated foreign terrorist organizations

In March 2011, the London Telegraph reported that Libya’s rebels had
direct ties to Al Qaeda and that both leaders and fighters had spent
time in both Iraq and Afghanistan combating US troops. The article
titled, “Libyan rebel commander admits his fighters have al-Qaeda links”
featured Abdel-Hakim al-Hasidi, who had been captured by the US after
fighting Americans in Afghanistan, returned to Libya, and released under
a bargain for Hasidi and his Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG)
militants to abandon extremism and become productive members of society.
Quite obviously, and with the US, UK, and NATO’s help, Hasidi and his
men went back on this bargain and are now sowing murder and mayhem
across Libya.

The New York Time more recently reported in an article titled, “Exiled Islamists Watch Rebellion Unfold at Home”
that LIFG has “renounced Al Qaeda and are part of the mosaic of rebel
fighters united under the umbrella of the Transitional National Council,
the opposition leadership that the United States formally recognized as
Libya’s legitimate government.” Of course, “renouncement” is exactly
what these very same men did to be released from Qaddafi’s prisons in
the first place before immediately taking up arms and laying waste to
the nation. The New York Times also notes that exiled LIFG leader Abu
Sohaib, currently being harbored in London, is unable to return to Libya
because he and LIFG is a listed terrorist across the Middle East and
throughout most of Europe, including the UK.
His LIFG fighters are noted as having “combat experience in Iraq or
Afghanistan,” and that they are part of the “social fabric of eastern
Libya,” namely Benghazi, Tobruk, and Darnah in a region often referred
to as Cyrenaica.

Image: Taken from a US West Point study,
these graphs created by data obtained in Iraq clearly show that Libya’s
eastern region, and the cities of Darnah and Benghazi in particular,
provided by far more militants found fighting US troops in Iraq than any
other nation, including Saudi Arabia. An apt summary of the report can
be found at Tarpley.net. (click image to enlarge)

To get a clearer picture of just how much of the “social fabric of eastern Libya” these Al Qaeda LIFG fighters make up, a study from West Point US Military Academy
indicates that this region produced more foreign fighters per capita
found in Iraq than any other nation including Saudi Arabia. The vast
majority of these fighters came from Darnah and Benghazi, the latter
being the epicenter of the current Libyan rebellion. The report, explained in detail by geopolitical analyst Dr. Webster Tarpley, proves just how understated the New York Times article is in portraying these terrorists as
“part of the social fabric of eastern Libya.” The facts prove quite
clearly that terrorism is the social fabric of eastern Libya.

Just this week, the UK Independent provided its readership with a watered down headline that reads, “Rebel military chief says he was tortured by CIA.”
The article indicates that the current rebel leader, Abdulhakim Belhaj
(aka Abdel-Hakim al-Hasidi) is in fact an LIFG founding member, with
combat experience in Afghanistan against the Russians, omits that he was
also involved in fighting US troops there in 2001, but does mention
that he was held by the CIA, then the Libyan government before taking
command of NATO-backed rebels in Libya. The Daily Beast reports in an
article titled, “Libya’s Powerful Islamist Leader,”
that Belhaj was in fact, face-to-face with Osama Bin Laden back in the
1980′s, and that the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) is listed by
both the U.S. State Department and the British Home Office as an international terrorist organization.

Image: A screenshot taken directly from the US State Department website
showing the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) clearly listed as a
foreign terrorist organization. This is important, as US Code prohibits
providing material support to listed terrorist organizations. With
revelations of Al Qaeda and LIFG fighters leading the Libyan rebellion
with NATO-members’ full military, financial, and diplomatic support,
attempts are being made to plea ignorance as to the true nature of the
rebels. Listed below LIFG, is MEK, an Iraqi/Iranian group also being
armed and supported by the US. (click on image to enlarge)

With the corporate media’s help, Belhaj/al-Hasidi and his men are
being portrayed as reformed terrorists despite the fact that they are
still LIFG fighters and LIFG itself is still listed as an international
terrorist organization. And while many will applaud the corporate media
for coming forward with this information, it should be noted that Pepe Escobar first broke this story on Russia Today,
and the US and British propaganda outlets have merely been forced to
address the growing public awareness of who these “pro-democracy” rebels
really are and what role the US and British governments have had in
betraying their people by providing material support for men who
literally killed US and UK troops in both Iraq and Afghanistan over the
10 year “War on Terror.”

According to US Code Section 2339A & 2339B,
the leaders of NATO, along with the US, UK, and French governments, are
clearly guilty of providing a listed terrorist organization with
material support in the most egregious, overt case since the code was
written. The staggering scale of training, arming,
and providing air support for Libyan Islamic Fighting Group militants,
listed by the US State Department itself as a terrorist organization,
all done criminally under the guise of “international law” rubber
stamped by the contrived UN and bolstered with support from the equally contrived International Criminal Court, may be partially why more people are unable to understand the scope of criminality involved in NATO’s intervention in Libya.

A similar situation exists within Iran, where another terrorist
organization, the Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK) are being covertly armed and
aided in fighting the Iranian government. US policy makers are fully
aware that organizations like LIFG and MEK have US blood on their hands.
In fact, their only concern is how using such organizations will appear
publicly and how such perceptions might threaten their agendas. In the
Fortune 500-funded Brookings Institution report, “Which Path to Persia?”
we can see clearly the thought process that goes on behind supporting
terrorist organizations. Brookings’ only concern is how to remove MEK
terrorists from the US State Department list (listed just below LIFG) so
they can be supported more overtly in a Libyan-style military
intervention.

“Potential Ethnic Proxies,” page 117-118 (page 130-131 of the PDF):
“Perhaps the most prominent (and certainly the most controversial)
opposition group that has attracted attention as a potential U.S. proxy
is the NCRI (National Council of Resistance of Iran), the political
movement established by the MEK (Mujahedin-e Khalq). Critics believe the
group to be undemocratic and unpopular, and indeed anti-American.

In contrast, the group’s champions contend that the movement’s
long-standing opposition to the Iranian regime and record of successful
attacks on and intelligence-gathering operations against the regime make
it worthy of U.S. support. They also argue that the group is no longer
anti-American and question the merit of earlier accusations. Raymond
Tanter, one of the group’s supporters in the United States, contends
that the MEK and the NCRI are allies for regime change in Tehran and
also act as a useful proxy for gathering intelligence. The MEK’s
greatest intelligence coup was the provision of intelligence in 2002
that led to the discovery of a secret site in Iran for enriching
uranium.

Despite its defenders’ claims, the MEK remains on the U.S. government
list of foreign terrorist organizations. In the 1970s, the group killed
three U.S. officers and three civilian contractors in Iran. During the
1979-1980 hostage crisis, the group praised the decision to take America
hostages and Elaine Sciolino reported that while group leaders publicly
condemned the 9/11 attacks, within the group celebrations were
widespread.

Undeniably, the group has conducted terrorist attacks—often excused
by the MEK’s advocates because they are directed against the Iranian
government. For example, in 1981, the group bombed the headquarters of
the Islamic Republic Party, which was then the clerical leadership’s
main political organization, killing an estimated 70 senior officials.
More recently, the group has claimed credit for over a dozen mortar
attacks, assassinations, and other assaults on Iranian civilian and
military targets between 1998 and 2001. At the very least, to work more
closely with the group (at least in an overt manner), Washington would
need to remove it from the list of foreign terrorist organizations.”

US policy makers, working directly for Wall Street and London corporate-financier interests,
clearly have no qualms over using or supporting terrorism, with
perception management being their only concern. We see this diabolical
methodology, precisely articulated in “Which Path to Persia?”
now being executed across Libya verbatim. It looks as if there was not
enough time to get LIFG off various international lists of terrorist
organizations as Brookings had hoped to do with MEK, and instead a
concerted effort by the corporate-media and NATO members is being made
to downplay the reality that the US, British, French and Qatari
governments are openly sponsoring terrorism. Look for similar narratives
as seen in Libya to be used in
both Syria and Iran – with militant terrorists portrayed as hapless
protesters being oppressed by a brutal government, before a full-scale
military insurrection followed by a US led military intervention.

ALSO SEE:
THE REBELS – WHO THEY ARE


source:

http://libya360.wordpress.com/2011/09/03/libyan-rebels-currently-listed-by-u-s-state-department-as-terrorists/