September 9, 2011

[Speaking Truth To Power]

When NATO inserted itself into the Libyan conflict it told the world that the mission was to protect "civilians" from supposed genocidal threats made by Colonel Quathafi.

So why isn’t NATO objecting to the targeted attacks on Black Libyans, and African migrant workers, by these same "rebels?" Is NATO condoning the ethnic cleansing of Blacks in Libya?

With much of Libya now under the control of the armed insurrectionists from Benghazi, the picture of the new Libya that’s emerging is extremely chilling. It’s one of fanaticism and racism. Ironically, these supposed Muslims are more in line with the minority that is characteristic of religious zealotry.

For months now, it has seemed very likely Libya under the insurrectionists would become a stringently religious state—with a twisted view of Sharia law. And for all the claims of "mass rapes" under Col. Quathafi, women now have cause to worry about their liberty under the rule of these regressive charlatans.

Now we must ask: is it possible the rest of Black Africa can have cordial relations with these "rebels" now that their crimes of bigotry are being exposed? Early on in the Libya conflict, charges were made that Col. Quathafi hired legions of Black mercenaries from sub-Saharan Africa. It’s becoming increasingly clear that assertion was not only a lie—but a racist one.

Unfortunately, until recently, that falsehood was being amplified by all of corporate media. This past Sunday, even The New York Times finally ran a story admitting this despicable fable. The Times piece reported that "many rebels were turning their wrath against migrants from sub-Saharan Africa, imprisoning hundreds for the crime of fighting as 'mercenaries’ for Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi without any evidence except the color of their skin."

The story noted "Human rights advocates say the rebels’ scapegoating of blacks here follows a similar campaign that ultimately included lynchings after rebels took control of the eastern city of Benghazi."

The imprisonments, of Black Libyans and Africans, expose "a deep-seated racism and anti-African sentiment in Libyan society," said Peter Bouckaert a Human Rights researcher who visited Libyan jails where these Africans are held. "It is very clear to us that most of those detained were not soldiers and have never held a gun in their life," he said.

Still not a single statement from the U.S. government.

Unfortunately, most of the establishment press has ignored the crimes that have been perpetrated against these Black Libyans and Africans by the Benghazi brutes. However, The Wall Street Journal, on June 11, 2011, highlighted some of the racist crimes by these "rebels."

That story told the tale of the southern city of Tawergha which was inhabited predominantly by Black Libyans, who were targeted for attacks by "rebel" forces loyal to the rich merchant class of Misrata. To justify their attacks on Tawerghans, charges were made that Tawerghans were pro-Quathafi loyalists who committed mass murder and raped Libyan women.

In fact, there are reports of Black Libyans who’re being branded as mercenaries and will face death, or, expulsion from the country of their birth—because of their skin color. It should be noted the "rebels" used these very lies against the scores of African migrant workers that came to Libya to work, under the Quathafi government.

The Journal story pointed out "rebel leaders are also calling for drastic measures like banning Tawergha natives from ever working, living or sending their children to schools in Misrata." Moreover, these supposed liberators of Libya have a brigade whose slogan reads "the Brigade for Purging Slaves, Black Skins."

Besides being linked to Al-Qaeda—read the Sinjar Records Report--and killing god knows how many American soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan, we now have proof these "rebels" are also racists.

Could it be these NATO-backed "rebels" are now in the process of turning Libya into an apartheid-like state? But then, why should we be surprised Western leaders are helping these racists from Benghazi gain control of Libya?

No doubt, one of the reasons the West, like these Benghazi bigots, wanted Col. Quathafi gone was his commitment to forging positive, prosperous  relations with African people. These prejudiced "protesters" no doubt have no such inclination given their slogan about "purging slaves, black skins."  And that, probably, suits European leaders just fine.

The truth is: anybody committed to securing the future stability of Africa, for Black Africans, represents a dangerous paradigm shift for the white, Western status quo. Such a scenario would mean Africa would once again become a first world nation. And, Europeans would no longer be able to enrich themselves by perpetually raping the natural resources of the richest continent on the face of the earth—while impoverishing Africans in the process.

Is it conceivable Europeans leaders don’t know these "rebels" are lying lynchers of Black Libyans and African migrant workers? Why is the compromised, establishment media so silent about these assaults against Africans?

Where are all these exemplars of journalism, like CNN, CBS and the rest? Do they think the truth about these murderers can be hidden forever? Are these realities to troubling to the nice narrative that has been concocted by Britain, France and the U.S.? Is America’s first Black president comfortable knowing he’s helped enabled an Arab version of the Ku Klux Klan?

The slaughter of Black Libyans, by these NATO-backed bigots is a damning indictment against the Western political establishment. Far from bringing freedom to Libya, NATO and the West has helped to re-introduce a racist menace in Africa. The Africa Union should stand strong and condemn these murderers of Africans—and those in the West who helped them gain power in Libya.


"Speaking Truth To Empower."

Source