Gadhafi is killed

Going For A Grand Slam

Obama.........

-Bin Laden
-al Alwaki
-Gaddhafi

Obama on third base and going for a Grand Slam on Foreign Policy. He took all 3 of these mofos out within a year without losing American troops lives.

The Republicans are on big time damage control cuz they been mouthing off on Obama's involvement in Libya.

Don't worry........Obama got 2012 on lockdown.

LOL!

​

 

Obama didn't take anybody out...

He's a Wall Street speach reader.

 

Don't forget however that in being a Black man he had to work twice as hard than a man of any color. Which means Obama may kill one or more torrorists or leaders to get him to the top. Where is Pizza Man?

 

***********8b0000]What Libya had achieved

Public Health Care
Public Health Care in Libya prior to NATO’s “Humanitarian Intervention” was the best in Africa. “Health care is [was] available to all citizens free of charge by the public sector. The country boasts the highest literacy and educational enrolment rates in North Africa. The Government is [was] substantially increasing the development budget for health services…. (WHO Libya Country Brief )
Confirmed by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO),undernourishment was less than 5 %, with a daily per capita calorie availability of 3144 calories.
The Libyan Arab Jamahiriya provided to its citizens what is denied to many Americans: Free public health care, free education, as confirmed by WHO and UNESCO data.
According to the World Health Organization (WHO): Life expectancy at birth was 72.3 years (2009), among the highest in the developing World.


Libyan Arab Jamahiriya General information
2009 Total population (000) 6 420
Annual population growth rate (%) ^ 2.0
Population 0-14 years (%) 28
Rural population (%) ^ 22
Total fertility rate (births per woman) ^ 2.6
Infant mortality rate (0/00) ^
17 Life expectancy at birth (years) ^ 75
GDP per capita (PPP) US$ ^ 16 502 GDP growth rate (%) ^ 2.1
Total debt service as a % of GNI ^ ...
Children of primary school-age who are out of school (%) (1978) 2

Libyan Arab Jamahiriya (2009)
Total life expectancy at birth (years) 72.3
Male life expectancy at birth (years) 70.2
Female life expectancy at birth (years) 74.9
Newborns with low birth weight (%) 4.0
Children underweight (%) 4.8
Perinatal mortality rate per 1000 total births 19
Neonatal mortality rate 11.0
Infant mortality rate (per 1000 live births) 14.0
Under five mortality rate (per 1000 live
births) 20.1
Maternal mortality ratio (per 10000 live births) 23


Education
The adult literacy rate was of the order of 89%, (2009), (94% for males and 83% for females). 99.9% of youth are literate(UNESCO 2009 figures, See UNESCO, Libya Country Report)

Gross primary school enrolment ratio was 97% for boys and 97% for girls (2009) .
(see UNESCO tables athttp://stats.uis.unesco.org/unesco/T...R_Region=40525
The pupil teacher ratio in Libya's primary schools was of the order of 17 (1983 UNESCO data), 74% of school children graduating from primary school were enrolled in secondary school (1983 UNESCO data).
Based on more recent date, which confirms a marked increase in school enrolment, the Gross Enrolment Ratio (GER) in secondary schools was of the order of 108% in 2002. The GER is the number of pupils enrolled in a given level of education regardless of age expressed as a percentage of the population in the theoretical age group for that level of education.
For tertiary enrolment (postsecondary, college and university), the Gross Enrolment Ratio (GER) was of the order of 54% in 2002 (52 for males, 57 for females).
(For further details seehttp://stats.uis.unesco.org/unesco/T...R_Region=40525

Women's Rights

With regard to Women's Rights, World Bank data point to significant achievements.

"In a relative short period of time, Libya achieved universal access for primary education, with 98% gross enrollment for secondary, and 46% for tertiary education. In the past decade, girls’ enrollment increased by 12% in all levels of education. In secondary and tertiary education, girls outnumbered boys by 10%." (World Bank Libya Country Brief, emphasis added)

Price Controls over Essential Food Staples
In most developing countries, essential food prices have skyrocketed, as a result of market deregulation, the lifting of price controls and the eliminaiton of subsidies, under "free market" advice from the World Bank and the IMF.
In recent years, essential food and fuel prices have spiralled as a result of speculative trade on the major commodity exchanges.
Libya was one of the few countries in the developing World which maintained a system of price controls over essential food staples.
World Bank President Robert Zoellick acknowledged in an April 2011 statement that the price of essential food staples had increased by 36 percent in the course of the last year. See Robert Zoellick, World Bank
The Libyan Arab Jamahiriya had established a system of price controls over essential food staples, which was maintained until the onset of the NATO led war.
While rising food prices in neighbouring Tunisia and Egypt spearheaded social unrest and political dissent, the system of food subsidies in Libya was maintained.
These are the facts confirmed by several UN specialised agencies. [/COLOR]

 

[YOUTUBE]hJm5O2dV_RY[/YOUTUBE]

 

Financial Heist of the Century: Confiscating Libya’s Sovereign Wealth Funds (SWF)

By Manlio Dinucci
www.globalresearch.ca

The objective of the war against Libya is not just its oil reserves (now estimated at 60 billion barrels), which are the greatest in Africa and whose extraction costs are among the lowest in the world, nor the natural gas reserves of which are estimated at about 1,500 billion cubic meters.

In the crosshairs of “willing” of the operation “Unified Protector” there are sovereign wealth funds, capital that the Libyan state has invested abroad.

The Libyan Investment Authority (LIA) manages sovereign wealth funds estimated at about $70 billion U.S., rising to more than $150 billion if you include foreign investments of the Central Bank and other bodies.

But it might be more.

Even if they are lower than those of Saudi Arabia or Kuwait, Libyan sovereign wealth funds have been characterized by their rapid growth.

When LIA was established in 2006, it had $40 billion at its disposal.

In just five years, LIA has invested over one hundred companies in North Africa, Asia, Europe, the U.S. and South America: holding, banking, real estate, industries, oil companies and others.

In Italy, the main Libyan investments are those in UniCredit Bank (of which LIA and the Libyan Central Bank hold 7.5 percent), Finmeccanica (2 percent) and ENI (1 percent), these and other investments (including 7.5 percent of the Juventus Football Club) have a significance not as much economically (they amount to some $5.4 billion) as politically.

Libya, after Washington removed it from the blacklist of “rogue states,” has sought to carve out a space at the international level focusing on “diplomacy of sovereign wealth funds.” Once the U.S. and the EU lifted the embargo in 2004 and the big oil companies returned to the country, Tripoli was able to maintain a trade surplus of about $30 billion per year which was used largely to make foreign investments.

The management of sovereign funds has however created a new mechanism of power and corruption in the hands of ministers and senior officials, which probably in part escaped the control of the Gadhafi himself:
This is confirmed by the fact that, in 2009, he proposed that the 30 billion in oil revenues go “directly to the Libyan people.”

This aggravated the fractures within the Libyan government.

U.S. and European ruling circles focused on these funds, so that before carrying out a military attack on Libya to get their hands on its energy wealth, they took over the Libyan sovereign wealth funds.

Facilitating this operation is the representative of the Libyan Investment Authority, Mohamed Layas himself: as revealed in a cable published by WikiLeaks. On January 20 Layas informed the U.S. ambassador in Tripoli that LIA had deposited $32 billion in U.S. banks. Five weeks later, on February 28, the U.S. Treasury “froze” these accounts.

According to official statements, this is “the largest sum ever blocked in the United States,” which Washington held “in trust for the future of Libya.”

It will in fact serve as an injection of capital into the U.S. economy, which is more and more in debt. A few days later, the EU “froze” around 45 billion Euros of Libyan funds.

The assault on the Libyan sovereign wealth funds will have a particularly strong impact in Africa.

There, the Libyan Arab African Investment Company had invested in over 25 countries, 22 of them in sub-Saharan Africa, and was planning to increase the investments over the next five years, especially in mining, manufacturing, tourism and telecommunications.

The Libyan investments have been crucial in the implementation of the first telecommunications satellite Rascom (Regional African Satellite Communications Organization), which entered into orbit in August 2010, allowing African countries to begin to become independent from the U.S. and European satellite networks, with an annual savings of hundreds of millions of dollars.

Even more important were the Libyan investment in the implementation of three financial institutions launched by the African Union: the African Investment Bank, based in Tripoli, the African Monetary Fund, based in Yaoundé (Cameroon), the African Central Bank, with Based in Abuja (Nigeria).

The development of these bodies would enable African countries to escape the control of the World Bank and International Monetary Fund, tools of neo-colonial domination, and would mark the end of the CFA franc, the currency that 14 former French colonies are forced to use.

Freezing Libyan funds deals a strong blow to the entire project. The weapons used by “the willing” are not only those in the military action called “Unified Protector.”

Il Manifesto, April 22, 2011



http://www.sovereignindependent.com/?p=18960

 

The Son of Africa claims a continent’s crown jewels

John Pilger
Published 20 October 2011


Barack Obama is leading the US at the head of a pack of western nations intent on the new scramble to exploit Africa’s resources. Their chief aim? To squeeze a China hungry for raw materials.





On 14 October, President Barack Obama announced that he was sending United States special forces to Uganda to join the civil war there. In the next few months, US combat troops will be sent to South Sudan, Congo and Central African Republic. They will "engage" only for "self-defence", says Obama, satirically. With Libya secured, an American invasion of the African continent is under way.

The press describes Obama's decision as "highly unusual" and "surprising", even "weird". It is none of these things. It is the logic of US foreign policy since 1945. Take Vietnam. The priority was to halt the alleged influence of China, an imperial rival, and "protect" Indonesia, which President Richard Nixon called "the region's richest hoard of natural resources . . . the greatest prize". Vietnam got in the way; the slaughter of more than three million Vietnamese and the devastation and poisoning of their land were the price of America achieving its goal.

As in all subsequent invasions by America, a trail of blood stretching from Latin America to Iraq and Afghanistan, the rationale was "self-defence" or "humanitarian", words long emptied of their dictionary meaning.

Proxy war

In Africa, says Obama, the "humanitarian mission" is to assist the government of Uganda to defeat the Lord's Resistance Army (LRA), which "has murdered, raped and kidnapped tens of thousands of men, women and children in Central Africa". This is an accurate description of the LRA, evoking multiple atrocities administered by the US, such as the bloodbath in the 1960s following the CIA-arranged murder of Patrice Lumumba, the independence leader and first legally elected prime minister of Congo, and the CIA coup that installed Mobutu Sese Seko, regarded as Africa's most venal tyrant.

Obama's other justification also invites satire. This is the "national security of the United States". The LRA has been doing its nasty work for 24 years. Today, it has fewer than 400 fighters, and has never been weaker. However, "US national security" usually means buying a corrupt and thuggish regime that has something Washington wants. Uganda's "president-for-life", Yoweri Museveni, is already receiving the larger part of $45m in US military "aid" - including Obama's favoured drones. This is his bribe to fight a proxy war against America's latest phantom Islamic enemy, the ragtag al-Shabaab, based in Somalia. The LRA will play a public relations role, distracting western journalists with its perennial horror stories.

However, the main reason the US is invading Africa is no different from that which ignited the Vietnam war. It is China. In the world of self-serving, institutionalised paranoia that justifies what General David Petraeus, the former US commander and now CIA director, implies is a state of perpetual war, China is replacing al-Qaeda as the official "threat".

When I interviewed Bryan Whitman, a dep*uty assistant secretary of defence, at the Pentagon last year, I asked him to describe the current danger to America. Struggling visibly, he repeated, "Asymmetric threats . . . asymmetric threats." These justify the money-laundering, state-sponsored arms conglomerates and the biggest military and war budget in history. With Osama Bin Laden airbrushed, China takes the mantle.

Africa is China's success story. Where the Americans bring drones and destabilisation, the Chinese bring roads, bridges and dams. What they want is resources, especially fossil fuels. With Africa's greatest oil reserves, Libya under Muammar al-Gaddafi was one of China's most important sources of fuel. When civil war broke out and Nato backed the "rebels" with a fabricated story about Gaddafi planning "genocide" in Benghazi, China evacuated its 30,000 workers in Libya. The subsequent UN Security Council resolution that allowed the west's "humanitarian intervention" was explained succinctly in a proposal to the French government by the "rebel" National Transitional Council, disclosed last month in the newspaper Libération, in which France was offered 35 per cent of Libya's gross national oil production "in exchange" (the term used) for "total and permanent" French support for the NTC. Running up the Stars and Stripes in "liberated" Tripoli, the US ambassador, Gene Cretz, blurted out: "We know that oil is the jewel in the crown of Libyan natural resources."

World domination

The de facto conquest of Libya by the US and its imperial partners heralds a modern version of the "Scramble for Africa" at the end of the 19th century. Like in the "victory" in Iraq, journalists have played a critical role in distinguishing between worthy and unworthy Libyan victims. A recent Guardian front page carried a photograph of a terrified "pro-Gaddafi" fighter and his wild-eyed captors who, the caption said, "celebrate". According to General Petraeus, there are now wars "of perception . . . conducted continuously through the news media".

For more than a decade, the US has tried to establish a command on the African continent, AFRICOM, but has been rebuffed by governments fearful of the regional tensions this would cause. Libya, and now Uganda, South Sudan and Congo, provide the main chance. As WikiLeaks cables and the US National Strategy for Counter-terrorism show, American plans for Africa are part of a global design in which 60,000 special forces, including death squads, operate in 75 countries. As the then defense secretary Dick Cheney pointed out in the 1990s, America simply wants to rule the world.

That this is now the gift of Barack Obama, the "Son of Africa", is supremely ironic. Or is it? As Frantz Fanon explained in Black Skin, White Masks, what matters is not so much the colour of your skin as the power you serve and the millions you betray.


http://www.newstatesman.com/international-politics/2011/10/pilger-china-obama-africa

 

WOW! just wow! but i`m not surprised! thanks for sharing

 

US targeting China’s Achilles heel

[/SIZE][/COLOR][/B]
Tuesday, Oct 11, 2011

While nervously watching China edging closer to becoming the predominant world power in the 21st century, Washington has also been keeping a keen eye on China’s heavy reliance on foreign oil to meet its growing energy needs. Engdahl analyses the oil trap that Washington has laid for China in Libya and through AFRICOM’s deployment in Africa.

************************


The Washington-led decision by NATO to bomb Gaddafi’s Libya into submission over recent months, at an estimated cost to US taxpayers of at least $1 billion, has little if anything to do with what the Obama Administration claims was a mission to “protect innocent civilians.”

In reality it is part of a larger strategic assault by NATO and by the Pentagon in particular to entirely control China’s economic Achilles heel, namely China’s strategic dependence on large volumes of imported crude oil and gas. Today China is the world’s second largest imported of oil after the United States and the gap is rapidly closing.

If we take a careful look at a map of Africa and also look at the African organization of the new Pentagon Africa Command—AFRICOM—the pattern that emerges is a careful strategy of controlling one of China’s most strategically important oil and raw materials sources.

NATO’s Libya campaign was and is all about oil.

But not about simply controlling Libyan high-grade crude because the USA is nervous about reliable foreign supplies.
It rather is about controlling China’s free access to long-term oil imports from Africa and from the Middle East.

In other words, it is about controlling China itself.

Libya geographically is bounded to its north by the Mediterranean directly across from Italy, where Italian ENI oil company has been the largest foreign operator in Libya for years. To its west it is bounded by Tunisia and by Algeria. To its south it is bounded by Chad. To its east it is bounded by both Sudan (today Sudan and Southern Sudan) and by Egypt.

That should tell something about the strategic importance of Libya from the standpoint of the Pentagon’s AFRICOM long-term strategy for controlling Africa and its resources and which country is able to get those resources.

Gaddafi’s Libya had maintained strict national state control over the rich reserves of high quality “light, sweet” Libyan crude oil.

As of 2006 data Libya had the largest proven oil reserves in Africa, some 35%, larger even than Nigeria.

Oil concessions had been extended to Chinese state oil companies as well as Russian and others in recent years.

Not surprisingly a spokesman from the so-called opposition claiming victory over Gaddafi, Abdeljalil Mayouf, information manager at Libyan rebel oil firm AGOCO, told Reuters, “We don’t have a problem with Western countries like the Italians, French and UK companies.
But we may have some political issues with Russia, China and Brazil.” China and Russia and Brazil either opposed UN sanctions on Libya or pressed for a negotiated settlement of the internal conflict and an end to NATO bombing.

As I have detailed elsewhere, [1] Gaddafi, an old adherent of Arab socialism on the line of Egypt’s Gamal Nasser, used the oil revenues to improve the lot of his people.
Health care was free as was education.
Each Libyan family was given a state grant of $50000 towards buying a new house and all bank loans were according to Islamic anti-usury laws, interest free.

The state was also free of debt.

Only by bribery and massive infiltration into the tribal opposition areas of the eastern part of the country could the CIA, MI6 and other NATO intelligence operatives, at an estimated cost of $1 billion, and massive NATO bombing of civilians, destabilize the strong ties between Gaddafi and his people.

Why then did NATO and the Pentagon lead such a mad and destructive assault on a peaceful sovereign country?
Clear is that one of the prime reasons was to complete the encirclement of China’s oil and vital raw material sources across northern Africa.

Between February and March 2011, China had evacuated some 36,000 of its nationals employed in the oil, construction, railways and telecoms industries.


Pentagon alarm over China
Step-by-step in the past several years Washington had begun to create the perception that China, which was the “dear friend and ally of America” less than a decade ago, was becoming the greatest threat to world peace because of China’s enormous economic expansion.
The painting of China as a new “enemy” has been complex as Washington is dependent on China to buy the lion’s share of the US Government debt in the form of Treasury paper.

In August the Pentagon released its annual report to Congress on China’s military status. [2] This year the report sent alarm bells ringing across China for a strident new tone.

The report stated among other things, “Over the past decade, China’s military has benefited from robust investment in modern hardware and technology.
Many modern systems have reached maturity and others will become operational in the next few years,” the Pentagon said in the report.
It added that “there remains uncertainty about how China will use its growing capabilities… China’s rise as a major international actor is likely to stand out as a defining feature of the strategic landscape of the early 21st century.” [3]

In a matter of perhaps two to five years, depending on how the rest of the world react or play their cards, the Peoples’ Republic of China will emerge in the controlled Western media painted as the new “Hitler Germany.”

If that seems hard to believe today, just reflect on how that was done with former Washington allies such as Egypt’s Mubarak or even Saddam Hussein.

In June this year, former US Secretary of the Navy and now US Senator from Virginia, James Webb, startled many in Beijing when he told press that China was fast approaching what he called a “Munich moment,” when Washington must decide how to maintain a strategic balance, a reference to the 1938 crisis over Czechoslovakia when Chamberlain opted for appeasement with Hitler over Czechoslovakia.

Webb added, “If you look at the last 10 years, the strategic winner has been China.” [4]

The same massively effective propaganda machine of the Pentagon, led by CNN, BBC, the New York Times or London Guardian will get the subtle command from Washington to “paint China and its leaders black.”

China is becoming far too strong and far too independent for many in Washington and in Wall Street.

To control that, above all China’s oil import dependency has been identified as her Achilles Heel.

Libya is a move to strike directly at that vulnerable Achilles heel.


China moves into Africa
The involvement of Chinese energy and raw materials companies across Africa had become a major cause of alarm in Washington where an attitude of malign neglect had dominated Washington Africa policy since the Cold War era.

As its future energy needs became obvious several years ago China began a major African economic diplomacy which reached a crescendo in 2006 when Beijing literally rolled out the red carpet to heads of more than forty African states and discussed a broad range of economic issues.

None were more important for Beijing than securing future African oil resources for China’s robust industrialization.

 

China moved into countries which had been virtually abandoned by former European colonial powers like France or Britain or Portugal.

Chad is a case in point. The poorest and most geographically isolated African countries, Chad was courted by Beijing which resumed diplomatic ties in 2006.

In October 2007 China’s state oil giant CNPC signed a contract to build a refinery jointly with Chad’s government. Two years later they began construction of an oil pipeline to carry oil from a new Chinese field in the south some 300 kilometres to the refinery. Western-supported NGO’s predictably began howling about environmental impacts of the Chinese oil pipeline. The same NGOs were curiously silent when Chevron struck oil in 2003 in Chad. In July 2011 the two countries, Chad and China celebrated opening of the joint venture oil refinery near Chad’s capital of Ndjamena. [5] Chad’s Chinese oil activities are strikingly close to another major Chinese oil project in what then was Sudan’s Darfur region bordering Chad.

Sudan had been a growing source of oil flows to China since cooperation began in the late 1990s after Chevron abandoned its stake there. By 1998 CNPC was building a 1500 km long oil pipeline from southern Sudan oilfields to Port Sudan on the Red Sea as well as building a major oil refinery near Khartoum. Sudan was the first large overseas oilfield project operated by China. By the beginning of 2011 Sudan oil, most all from the conflict-torn south, provided some 10% of China’s oil imports from taking more than 60% of Sudan’s daily oil production of 490,000 barrels. Sudan had become a point of vital Chinese national energy security.

According to geological estimates, the subsurface running from Darfur in what was southern Sudan through Chad into Cameroon is one giagantic oil field in extent perhaps equivalent to a new Saudi Arabia. Controlling southern Sudan as well as Chad and Cameroon is vital to the Pentagon strategy of “strategic denial” to China of their future oil flows. So long as a stable and robust Ghaddafi regime remained in power in Tripoli that control remained a major problem. The simultaneous splitting off of the Republic of South Sudan from Khartoum and the toppling of Ghaddafi in favor of weak rebel bands beholden to Pentagon support was for the Pentagon Full Spectrum Dominance of strategic priority.

AFRICOM responds
The key force behind the recent wave of Western military attacks against Libya or more covert regime changes such as those in Tunisia, Egypt and the fateful referendum in southern Sudan which has now made that oil-rich region “independent” has been AFRICOM, the special US military command established by the Bush Administration in 2008 explicitly to counter the growing Chinese influence over Africa’s vast oil and mineral wealth.

In late 2007, Dr. J. Peter Pham, a Washington insider who advises the US State and Defense Departments, stated openly that among the aims of the new AFRICOM, is the objective of “protecting access to hydrocarbons and other strategic resources which Africa has in abundance … a task which includes ensuring against the vulnerability of those natural riches and ensuring that no other interested third parties, such as China, India, Japan, or Russia, obtain monopolies or preferential treatment.” [6]

The China National Petroleum Company (C.N.P.C.) operates this exploration site southeast of Ndjamena, the capital of Chad. China has been investing in one African country after another. In large oil-exporting countries like Angola and Nigeria, China is building or fixing railroads, and landing giant exploration contracts in Congo and Guinea. In mineral-rich countries that had been all but abandoned by foreign investors because of unrest and corruption, Chinese companies are filling the void.





In testimony before the US Congress supporting creation of AFRICOM in 2007, Pham, who is associated with the neo-conservative Foundation for Defense of Democracies, stated:

“This natural wealth makes Africa an inviting target for the attentions of the People’s Republic of China, whose dynamic economy…has an almost insatiable thirst for oil as well as a need for other natural resources to sustain it…China is currently importing approximately 2.6 million barrels of crude per day, about half of its consumption; more than 765,000 of those barrels—roughly a third of its imports—come from African sources, especially Sudan, Angola, and Congo (Brazzaville). Is it any wonder, then, that…perhaps no other foreign region rivals Africa as the object of Beijing’s sustained strategic interest in recent years…

Intentionally or not, many analysts expect that Africa—especially the states along its oil-rich western coastline—will increasingly becoming a theatre for strategic competition between the United States and its only real near-peer competitor on the global stage, China, as both countries seek to expand their influence and secure access to resources.” [7]

It is useful to briefly recall the sequence of Washington-sponsored “Twitter” revolutions in the ongoing so-called Arab Spring. The first was Tunisia, an apparently insignificant land on north Africa’s Mediterranean. However Tunisia is on the western border of Libya. The second domino to fall in the process was Mubarak’s Egypt. That created major instability across the Middle East into north Africa as Mubarak for all his flaws had fiercely resisted Washington Middle East pollicy. Israel also lost a secure ally when Mubarak fell.

Then in July 2011 Southern Sudan declared itself the independent Republic of South Sudan, breaking away from Sudan after years of US-backed insurgency against Khartoum rule. The new Republic takes with it the bulk of Sudan’s known oil riches, something clearly not causing joy in Beijing. US Ambassador to the UN Susan Rice, led the US delegation to the independence celebrations, calling it “a testament to the Southern Sudanese people.” She added, in terms of making the secession happen, “the US has been as active as anyone.” US President Obama openly supported secession of the South. The breakaway was a project guided and financed from Washington since the Bush Administration decided to make it a priority in 2004. [8]

Now Sudan has suddenly lost its main source of hard currency oil revenue. The secession of the south, where three-quarters of Sudan’s 490 000 barrels a day of oil is produced, has aggravated economic difficulties in Khartoum cutting some 37% off its total revenues. Sudan’s only oil refineries and the only export route run north from oilfields to Port Sudan on the Red Sea in northern Sudan. South Sudan is now being encouraged by Washington to build a new export pipeline independent of Khartoum via Kenya. Kenya is one of the areas of strongest US military influence in Africa. [9]

The aim of the US-led regime change in Libya as well as the entire Greater Middle East Project which lies behind the Arab Spring is to secure absolute control over the world’s largest known oil fields to control future policies in especially countries like China. As then US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger is reported to have said during the 1970?s when he was arguably more powerful than the President of the United States, “If you control the oil you control entire nations or groups of nations.”

For the future national energy security of China the ultimate answer lies in finding secure domestic energy reserves. Fortunately there are revolutionary new methods to detect and map presence of oil and gas where even the best current geology says oil is not to be found. Perhaps therein lies a way out of the oil trap that has been laid for China. In my newest book, The Energy Wars I detail such new methods for those interested.


Notes:

[1] F. William Engdahl, “Creative Destruction: Libya in Washington’s Greater Middle East Project–Part II”, March 26, 2011.
[2] Office of the Secretary of Defense, “ANNUAL REPORT TO CONGRESS: Military and Security Developments Involving the People’s Republic of China 2011”, August 25, 2011.
[3] Ibid.
[4] Charles Hoskinson, “DOD report outlines China concerns”, August 25, 2011. http://www.politico.com/news/storie….
[5] Xinhua, “China-Chad joint oil refinery starts operating”, July 1, 2011.
BBC News, “Chad pipeline threatens villages”, 9 October 2009.
[6] F. William Engdahl, “China and the Congo Wars: AFRICOM. America’s New Military Command”, November 26, 2008.
[7] Ibid.
[8] Rebecca Hamilton, “US Played Key Role in Southern Sudan’s Long Journey to Independence”, July 9, 2011.
[9] Maram Mazen, “South Sudan studies new export routes to bypass the north”, March 12, 2011.


http://axisoflogic.com/artman/publish/Article_63891.shtml

 

[YOUTUBE]Gtj1uqXqKok[/YOUTUBE]


[YOUTUBE]Ui0mRiaWslM[/YOUTUBE]


5 dictators the U.S. still supports
America was a key backer of the Mubarak regime — at least, until the uprising in Cairo intensified this week. Which other autocrats in the region still enjoy U.S. support?
POSTED ON FEBRUARY 3, 2011, AT 2:12 PM


1. King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia
The U.S. has had a good relationship with Saudi Arabia since 1974, when Richard Nixon became the first American president to visit the country. The ties strengthened during George W. Bush's tenure — Saudi Arabia was certified as an anti-terrorism ally in 2007 — and King Abdullah maintains a good relationship with President Obama. And yet Saudi Arabia is indisputably an authoritarian regime. There is no elected parliament, public protests are banned, and the media is controlled by the state.
The United States' support of Abdullah may one day backfire, says Alex Welch at The Daily Campus. "On the day the Saudi monarchy collapses, the United States may find itself powerless to defeat any anti-American sentiment that may foster as a result."

2. President Ali Abdullah Saleh of Yemen
Yemen's leader for 32 years has been "one of America's foremost allies in the 'war on terror,'" says Kim Sengupta in The Independent, and has worked with the U.S. to target the country's large network of al Qaida operatives. Leaked WikiLeaks cables described how Saleh had covered up U.S. military strikes in the country and offered American forces an "open door" to execute more attacks. However, Saleh's grip on power will soon come to an end — an Egypt-style revolt has forced him to announce he will step down in 2013.

3. Sultan Qaboos bin Said Al-Said of Oman
The sultan of Oman has ruled over the country in a benevolent dictatorship since 1970, and has established an absolute monarchy under which all substantial decisions are made by him. Even so, Oman is one of America's oldest Arab allies, and one of the few Arab countries with which a free trade agreement has been signed. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton recently praised the "remarkable gains" made in Oman under the sultan's leadership.

4. Teodoro Obiang Nguema Mbasogo of Equatorial Guinea
The ruler of Equatorial Guinea was described as a "good friend" of the U.S. by Condoleezza Rice back in 2006, reports Justin Elliot at Salon, and continues to enjoy the support of the Obama administration. And yet, Human Rights Watch says Obiang's country is "mired in corruption, poverty, and repression," and his government "regularly engages in torture and arbitrary detention." The president's son reportedly spent more on luxury goods between 2004 and 2007 "than the country's annual education budget."

5. Gurbanguly Berdymukhamedov of Turkmenistan
Turkmenistan borders Afghanistan, and the U.S. has pursued a strategic alliance with President Berdymukhamedov to allow arms and supplies to travel through his country. Turkmenistan received $2 million in military aid last year, and its leader has met with Secretary of State Clinton and General David Petraeus. But "Turkmenistan is run by one of the most repressive regimes in existence," says Justin Elliott at Salon.
Restrictions on freedom, religion, the press, and movement are widespread, as are torture and detention of political prisoners.


http://theweek.com/article/index/211722/5-dictators-the-us-still-supports

 

Obama's foreign policy bona fides are the best since FDR. Taking out bin Laden would've been a strong enough achievement, but killing al-Awlaki and aiding in the anti-Gaddafi effort shows that the U.S. is strong in the right way.

The message needs to be constant that if you seek to inflict damage on the United States, there will be dire consequences.

All that said, this so-called "Arab Spring" is a byproduct of the global economic crisis that's sent entire regions reeling from what are sure to be lost generations of missed opportunities for young people.

 

LOL!!!

[YOUTUBE]4U8NPR6hS-I[/YOUTUBE]

[YOUTUBE]N9g2037e0BQ[/YOUTUBE]

[YOUTUBE]HgmUuxCiSSY[/YOUTUBE]

[YOUTUBE]OYKY2F8jy4U[/YOUTUBE]

[YOUTUBE]20alSXR873g[/YOUTUBE]

Now how do you feel about the murderers of your own country?

Saw a documentary on N. Korea. N that place is fucked up. They are called the hermit country of the world. Nobody is allowed in or out without permission from their president. Having a cell phone is a crime. Internet is not allowed. They are not allowed to worship anyone besides their president. They are literally brain washed into believing that he is God. All books there have one author........ Guess who that author is? Their president. They spend countless money on keeping people out and not allowing anyone out. and dont get me started on their prisons which are the size of cities and built strictly for the famlily members of those who try to escape.

Nobody does anything about this..... Why? Because they have no OIL or any worth while resource at that.

 

What about the fact CHINA protect them ?

 

[YOUTUBE]A4jQ1EBonhc[/YOUTUBE]

[YOUTUBE]RrNm-CBCXuM[/YOUTUBE]

[YOUTUBE]UI2ZiWEoaV0[/YOUTUBE]

China couldn't afford to protect N. Korea.

 

[YOUTUBE]qogT-DDKHgQ[/YOUTUBE]

Gaddafi’s legacy: The Great Man Made River

From the MSM talking heads you’d get the idea that Moammar Gaddafi’s simply skimming off a fortune from the Libyan people and giving them nothing.

We haven’t heard a single mention of what will undoubtedly stand as the greatest legacy of his administration, one of the greatest civil engineering projects in history, created to bring water to the nation’s towns and cities for the next 1,000 years.

It’s called the Great Man Made River, called “the largest water development scheme in the world” by the CIA World Factbook.

The project brings water to the cities of the popular north from the Nubian Sandstone Aquifer in the south, a vast underground reservoir of so-called fossil water dating back 40,000 years.

As Water-Technology.net observes, the water system is the world’s largest civil engineering project, which makes the lack of coverage by Western media seem rather odd.

The project has sunk wells into four major aquifer pockets, and current estimates indicate the project could provide for the nation’s water needs for as long as a thousand years.

John Watkins provided some key details in a 2006 BBC World Service report:


With fossil water available in most of Libya’s coastal cities, the government is now beginning to use its water for agriculture.

Over the country as a whole, 130,000 hectares of land will be irrigated for new farms. Some land will be given to small farmers who will grow produce for the domestic market. Large farms, run at first with foreign help, will concentrate on the crops that Libya currently has to import: wheat, oats, corn and barley.

Libya also hopes to make inroads into European and Middle-Eastern markets. An organic grape farm has been set up near Benghazi. Because the soil is so fertile, agronomists hope to grow two cereal crops a year.

It is hard to fault the Libyans on their commitment. They estimate that when the Great Man-Made River is completed, they will have spent almost $20bn. So far, that money has bought 5,000km of pipeline that can transport 6.5 million cubic metres of water a day from over 1,000 desert wells.

As a result, Libya is now a world leader in hydrological engineering, and it wants to export its expertise to other African and Middle-Eastern countries facing the same problems with their water.

And here are some numbers from the project’s website from 2008:
?Approximately 500,000 pre-stressed concrete cylinder pipes have been manufactured to date.
?Approximately 500,000 pipes transported to date. Pipe transportation is [a] continuous process and the work goes on day and night, distance traveled by the transporters is equivalent to the sun and back.
?Over 3,700 km of haul roads was constructed alongside the pipe line trench to enable the heavy truck – trailers to deliver pipe to the installation site
?Phase I: Total Length 1,600 Km.
?Phase II: Total Length 2,155 Km.
?Volume of Trench Excavation 250 Million Cubic Meter.
?The amount of aggregate used in the project : 30,000,000 Ton. Enough to Build 20 pyramids the size of the great pyramid of Khoufu.
?Total Weight of Cement used 7.0 Million Tones.
?Total Length of Pre-Stressing Wire 6.0 Million Kilometers. This would circle the Earth 280 times.
?The 1,300 wells which will be drilled will ultimately produce 6.5 Million cubic meters of water per day.

Given the desperate need for fresh water in North Africa, could it be that Libya’s Great Man Made River is an even more valuable resource than the nation’s considerable oil reserves?

And given that value, in a world where major powers direct military might toward the control of resources — and note that we’re now seeing the first Africom [previously] war — could it be that one of the hidden reasons for Odyssey Dawn in control of oil and water, which may well mix when it comes to causi belli?

http://richardbrenneman.wordpress.com/2011/03/24/gadaffi’s-legacy-the-great-man-made-river/

 

[YOUTUBE]hzTeLePbB08[/YOUTUBE]

 

[YOUTUBE]v4DnrFRcP_4[/YOUTUBE]

 

Interesting thread, however reading through it is like trying to decipher a Don Delillo novel. Too much dis-information and misdirection to know who the real 'bad guys' are and their true motivations.

I agree that U.S. involvement in Africa has much to do with oil reserves and competition with China for minerals and fossil fuels.
But the rest is too conspiratorial for my tastes.

 

You know who the bad guys are.

[YOUTUBE]U-vMBGx_mgk[/YOUTUBE]

1. Libya is one of Africa's largest exporters of oil, 1.7 million tons a day, which quickly was reduced to 300-400,000 ton due to US-NATO bombing. Libya exports 80% of its oil: 80% of that to several EU lands (32% Italy, 14% Germany, 10% France); 10% China; 5% USA.

2. Gaddafi has been preparing to launch a gold dinar for oil trade with all of Africa's 200 million people and other countries interested. French President Nickola Sarkozi called this, "a threat for financial security of mankind". Much of France's wealth—more than any other colonial-imperialist power—comes from exploiting Africa.

3. Central Bank of Libya is 100% owned by state (since 1956) and is thus outside of multinational corporation control (BIS-Banking International Settlement rules for private interests). The state can finance its own projects and do so without interest rates

4. Gaddafi-Central Bank used $33 billion, without interest rates, to build the Great Man-Made River of 3,750 kilometers with three parallel pipelines running oil, gas and water supplying 70% of the people (4.5 of its 6 million) with clean drinking and irrigation water.

5. The Central Bank also financed Africa's first communication satellite with $300 million of the $377 cost. It started up for all Africa, December 26, 2007, thus saving the 45-African nations an annual fee of $500 million pocketed by Europe for use of its satellites and this means much less cost for telephones and other communication systems.