The Libyan massacre: or rather protesters killed for Italian and European interests?

Libyan protesters are facing one of the most violent repressions that the wave of Arab revolts have witnessed to date. Yesterday reports of Libyan aircraft and Apache helicopters bombing and shooting the protesters started to circulate. This was just after Gaddafi’s son proclaimed to the world that Libya was not witnessing a revolt against one of the most oppressive and inhuman regimes in North Africa and the Middle East, but rather a civil war. In reality this is a regime that has declared, as many other times before, war on its own population. The question that we may ask, however, is why Gaddafi has preferred the bloodbath to an easy, and wealthy, exit. Many were the options open to him before he started the massacre. Now, of course, few are left. Is Gaddafi just defending his own interests? Is there something more than just a struggle to maintain power?

To understand this we have to move our attention from Libya to a European country: Italy, the gate to Europe for thousands of illegal migrants from Africa and in particular Libya. The Italian coasts have in recent years seen an increasing number of desperate people risking their life to cross the Mediterranean, often with the help of Mafia. Human trafficking is one of the most lucrative businesses – and one of the most cruel. If Italy is the usual arrival gate, Libya is often the gate of departure and the main hub of the exploitation of millions of young African hopes. Most of the previous Italian governments avoided any agreements and treaties with Gaddafi’s regime because of human rights concerns and the mistreatment of refugees and migrants.

The Berlusconi government, and in particular its main ally, the xenophobic Lega Nord, have changed approach and decided to create a partnership with the dictator, whom now appears to be a good friend of the ‘Cavaliere’. In spring 2008, Berlusconi visited Gaddafi in Benghazi where they signed a “treaty of friendship, partnership and cooperation” in which Italy agreed to pay 5 billion Euro in compensation for damage caused during Italy’s colonial rule in Libya. The treaty was then ratified in Rome in an extravagant state visit, which many Italians found repugnant because of Gaddafi’s lack of respect for Italian institutions and the dictator’s behavior. Berlusconi seemed ready to accept anything as long as Libya was ready to collaborate to stop the flux of immigrants, many of whom were (and are) real refugees.

Italy soon ended at the center of polemics, reports and criticism for how the refugees and immigrants, used and exploited by the Italian Mafia working on both sides of the Mediterranean, were handled and brought back to Libya where they face inhuman treatment, including having their boats shot at with new weapons provided by Italy, being left to drown in the sea without help, and being interred in detention camps in the middle of the desert. Many of these people disappeared, died in the desert, or were tortured in one way or another, and all of this occurred with the green light of Berlusconi’s government.

Yet while Gaddafi on the one hand promised to Berlusconi to stop the migrants, on the other he facilitated the departure of immigrants towards Italy. He used the immigrants and refugees and European as well as Italian fears as the most powerful blackmail for his businesses within Europe and in particular Italy. He literally sold the lives of the poorest for his and Berlusconi’s interests.

Which interests? Mutual financial interests with his friend Berlusconi and the Italian financial world, including the giant ENI, the Italian oil and gas company-with a history of mysteries and intrigues. It may be interesting to list the main financial and business agreements:

ENI has extensive operations in Libya, including long-term take-or-pay contracts. The company intended to invest $25 billion in Libya. Gaddafi has also expressed its interest in buying a stake in ENI, but has not specified how much it holds. Impreglio, the biggest builder in Italy has pre-qualified for a Libyan motorway project financed by Rome that is worth as much as 5 billion Euro. Also this company may have been targeted by Gaddafi for his investments.

Finmeccanica, the Italian aerospace and defense company has also won Libyan contracts, including a 247 million Euro rail contract last year, and has said it is eyeing more orders from the North African state. Unsurprisingly, this time the Libyan Investment Authority also holds a 2.01 percent stake in the company.

But perhaps the most important is Unicredit, a bank increasingly under the control of Lega Nord. Libya’s stake in banking group UniCredit stands at a total 7.5 percent after the Libyan Investment Authority (LIA) acquired a 2.59 percent stake in Italy’s biggest lender.

Do I need to provide more evidence of the strong link between Berlusconi’s government and Gaddafi’s interests? Italy is the main gate for Gaddafi’s family to reach even more markets in Europe. The potential result of the revolt is clear: economic damage and the risk of a great increase in migrants, first for Italy and then for all Europe. For Italy (the former colonizer and still very much a consumer of Libyan resources) and the rest of Europe, the revolt for regime change and a possible democracy is in many respects a nightmare. Hence Gaddafi can expect all the needed support – not only material and moral, but also possibly strategic. More will be known about this if the protesters succeed.

It is clear that the Libyans are not just facing the brutality of Gaddafi’s regime but also the mega interests of Italian (and other European) corporations which need the revolt to fail. Hence the attempt to show that Gaddafi is open to ‘reforms’ or the downplay of the human cost and tragedy of this revolt. It is also likely that the “Islamist threat” card will be played very soon to try to discredit the revolt, or otherwise we may perhaps see a direct ‘humanitarian’ intervention by Italy. The struggle for freedom for the Libyans will be more difficult than it was for the Egyptians, and more blood will be spilled, but the risk of failure is great. Italy and much of Europe, indeed, have not given the green light to change that the US did in Egypt. The reason: the US controls the high ranking Egyptian military officers, while Europe can only ever hope to control the old bloodthirsty Colonel and his family.

8 thoughts on “The Libyan massacre: or rather protesters killed for Italian and European interests?

Add yours

  1. One Point on Rebels being AQ and then Tribal Background to the Conflict


    Generally, Al-Qeada has the same mentality all over the globe, and that is that all Arab regimes that are not the caliphate are illegitimate. The geographic region in which they operate may change, but generally their main goal is what is the same. If you understand this mindset you can see how the US and various other intelligence communities can use AQ when they want, as they are now in Libya, and against them whenever they want as well. Boots on the ground are fighting for whatever reason they want, but the high ups on the organization chart are working for the CIA. This creates Al-CIA-da. Here is a video that talks about the number one AQ target dinning at the Pentagon with top military brass. When you are building empire you don’t look at as good people and bad people, you look at things in terms of who can help you advance you geopolitical agenda.

    Libya Tribes and the Conflict

    The rebels are mainly the Zawayya tribe. A smaller division of this tribe is the Harabi tribe, and an ever further division of this tribe is the Obeidat tribe. Of course everyone realizes that Italy colonized this area of northern Libya, which is also known as Cyrenaica. After the defeat of Italy and Germany in WWII, the British took over the area. Previously, Muhammad Idris bin Muhammad al-Mahdi as-Senussi and the Senussi Order had been leading the rebellion against the Italians. After fleeing to Egypt, the Order appears to have made friends with the British and after WWII the Brits handed over power and appointed the leader king. This is the King Idris that Gaddafi ousted. Another tribe in the west of Libya is the Fezzan. The Fezzan are mostly black or very dark. There have been reports of the rebels lynching members of the Fezzan tribe. The elite of the world has got their foot in the door with the Libya attacks. The public fell for it hook line and sinker. Protesters do not have rockets and AK’s. The rebels have also established their own central bank is already striking deals with countries for the oil that is in the East of Libya. This is a page right out of the globalist banking cartel handbook. East and West Libya here we come!!! In the future the banksters can fund both the East and West in the next episode of this sick drama of death and destruction. Maybe they can even maneuver some false flag terror in the US or Europe to win even more support by the general public. DIABOLICAL!!!

  2. This is a civil war in Libya. Original reports of Gaddafi strafing his own protesters were called out by Russia as an absolute fabrication, just as reports he had fled to Venezuela, and then again to Zimbabwe. Not sure exact about the time line of things but there is a very large amount of information that shows SAS was operating in Libya assisting the rebels about a month and half ago. It is clear to me that there were two things going on in Libya simultaneously. One, there were real protesters engaged in protests against Gaddafi (one possible explanation as to what their grievances could be will be discussed later). I’m sure that there was violence against the protesters, much like we have seen in Bahrain, Saudi, and Yemen. Hypocritically there has been no action against these countries. Second, at the same time the rebels were engaged in insurrection. Gaddafi attacked these rebels and various intelligence agencies, most likely SAS, used their media puppets to spread the misinformation about the strafing mentioned above. ANY country would handle an insurrection in the same fashion that Gaddafi handled it.

    Going back to the hypocritical nature of the US’s selective humanitarian endeavors, if we could get past all the posturing and rhetoric we would understand that WWIII is currently underway. Under the Bush regime the US invaded Afghanistan and Iraq, and now the Obama regime has brought war, or maybe better explained by calling it a drastic escalation of war in Pakistan, and has now led the charge (not the actual bombing) for military action in Libya. Pakistan is one area that we surely don’t care much for humanitarianism. Dr. M has written at least one blog on the drone attacks that target supposed terrorist while killing 20 to even sometimes 50 innocent people in the process. Obama is really just continuing the agenda of Bush and the neo-cons. Bush was the iron fist and Obama is the iron fist in the velvet glove. Which is scarier?

    If readers are not yet convinced that this war against Libya is an absolute farce, might you be convinced if I told you that the Libyan rebels are Al-Qaeda? The leader of the Libyan rebels, Abdel-Hakim al-Hasidi, admitted that he provided fighter to Iraq in the Italian newspaper Il Sole 24 Ore. Here is great article on the subject and related issues. Please check this guy’s bio too; It’s impressive.

    As mentioned previously in this post, I brought up a possible issue that the actual protesters and the rebels might have with Gaddafi. Dr. M might have more insight into this issue than I, but I understand that is Libya is somewhat separated ethnically. I remember Gaddafi mentioning something along the lines of Europe should be ready to take black Africans into Europe as political refugees. At first, I thought Gaddafi was on another one of his Hashish rants (maybe you would be addicted to Hash too if your 1 and half year old daughter had been killed by Regan’s bombardments) when he made these comments. After looking into it a bit further I believe he thinks that the Arabs in the East will ethnically cleanse West Libya of black Africans. I would also add that this comes at a time when many European leaders have publically announced multiculturalism as a failure. All of this makes me believe this has the potential of being another Iraq type invasion where the strong man is keeping stability in a potentially very dangerous situation. The US, or any of the ex-colonial powers conducting the military operations have no ability to keep stability after Gaddafi goes and an even bigger problem will have been created. See Iraq.

    Another import aspect of the Libyan war (and it is a WAR… don’t believe the Orwellian phrase of “kinetic military action”…War is never Peace and Freedom is never Slavery) is the issue of depleted uranium. If you still believe in the humanitarian goals of military action in Libya, then consider that Fallujah has seen 12-14 times normal amounts of birth defects and returning US troops have seen a 4 times increase in birth defects in their children as a result of DU being used. I have no doubts that we are using depleted uranium on Libya and in about ten years or so we will find out the impact of the coalition’s action on the same civilians the coalition is supposed to be protecting.

    I also smell the stench of the “white man’s burden” in all of this. It reeks of the colonial mentality just as the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan. The high morals of the Anglo Establishment must again step in and deliver justice for another country of brown people (sarcasm).

    Also, in 2009 Gaddafi threw around the “N” word. International banking cartels never want to hear the word “nationalization” when your country has the largest oil reserves in all of Africa. Just wanted to add another possible reason for the military action.

    The US is making a geopolitical power play in the Middle East right now. The US is broke and all Empires make war when they are broke. The economic recovery here in the US is as fake as the Neocon’s proof of WMD’s in Iraq. WWIII is going on as we speak and the pieces are being put into place for WWIV. Once we destabilize the area through using fake, Facebook CIA revolutions, or resorting to war if that fails we can put in extremist or deviants so we can take action against them 10 years or so down the road (WWIV). We can just say they have links to AQ. The AQ that we control and move into the position we want to invade next. We can attack or use AQ as our friends like we are now doing in Libya. The AQ card is the gift that keeps on giving (sarcasm again). This shows what the real agenda for all these revolutions in the ME are about, and lets not forget that all these attempts for revolution started with Iran, which is the country the US has been itching to go to war with now for the past 10 years.

    Gaddafi should stay, fight, and end up shahid. That seems like a better option than ending up with DDS (Deposed Dictator Syndrome) like Ben Ali and Mubarak.

    Dr. M mentions the possibility of the “Islamist Threat” interfering with the humanitarian mission. DR. M.. THE ISLAMIS THREAT IS THE REBELS WE ARE ASSISTING. Have you now switched over the side of AQ? (SARCASM)

Leave a Reply to HamzaRevertAnthropologyBA Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Create a website or blog at

Up ↑

%d bloggers like this: