Wars and Revolutions

[col. writ. 6/15/11] (c) '11 Mumia Abu-Jamal

  As NATO targets Libyan leader, Col. Muammar Qadhafi, the cover story, that its
bombastic efforts are designed to 'protect civilians', is wearing exceedingly
thin.

  Daily, its efforts, including the targeting of Qadhafi for assassination and he
killing of members of his family, look like regime change - suspiciously similar
to Iraq of several years ago.

  As for the assassination charge, Britains' Sir David Richards, Chief of the
Defense staff, answered questions to that effect by declaring, "Absolutely not.
It is not allowed under the UN Resolution" (LATUR 94/11, 71.  Those assurances
were blasted into confetti by leading British politicians.

  Indeed, the Iraqi pattern is virtually identical: demonization in the corporate
press, no fly zones, bombing aimed at the leader and/or his family, and (once
assassination is accomplished) the installation of a compliant, Western-friendly
puppet who acquiesces to the looting of his country's natural resources for
foreign profit.

  When did the West ever care about Arabs? (Other than sheikhs or princes, that
is.)  David Morrison, writing in a recent edition of Labour & Trade Union Review*
answers the question thusly:

         It is inconceivable that the Governments of France and Britain and the US
embarked on this mission out of concern for the lives of Libyan civilians.
In recent years, the US itself has killed hundreds  of civilians in
         Pakistan in drone attacks, triggered from the safety of mainland US.  The
slaughter has intensified under the Obama administration and it is still
going on. Has France or Britain  ever expressed any concern for these
civilian killings, carried out regularly by their close ally? Of course
not. {8}

  Morrison goes on to write of the thousands of Lebanese and Palestinians killed by
Israeli bombing in 2006 and 2008 - 2009, "without any call for a No Fly Zone"
from any of the states now leveling Libya.

  Morrison notes: "In the case of Lebanon in the Summer of 2006, the US and Britain
acted to prolong the conflict, and the killing: {8}

  Clearly, Morrison writes, "another reason", motivates the Western powers other
than the  suffering or the bombing of Arab civilians, which they, or their
allies, do with reckless abandon.

  Morrison writes:
         Though Qadhafi has accommodated himself to Western interests in recent
years, and opposes Al Qaeda, he has maintained  the coherence of the Arab
nationalist State he has built, and retained a form of Socialism in its
structures. This is intolerable to Western interests, which prefer to see
a mess a la Iraq, rather than a strong State pursuing the interests of its
people in its own way. The plan, therefore, is to destroy the Libyan State
under humanitarian and democratic guise. It is no concern of the West that
it may be unleashing a bloodbath. 

  First Iraq, then Libya; that leaves the last Arab Socialist State, Syria.  That's
why France and Britain and the US are bombing Libya. {8}

  My sentiments, exactly.

--(c) '11 maj
{*Source: Morrison, David, "Libya", Labour & Trade Union Review, April, 2011, [No.
216. 6-8]
(Note: L&TUR is published in London, UK: (www.ltureview.com)