Skip to main content

Gaddafi's switching roles under Western manipulation until the final destruction of Libya

From the documentary HyperNormalisation by Adam Curtis


Faced with the humiliating defeat in the Lebanon, President Reagan’s government was desperate to shore up the vision of a moral world where a good America struggled against evil. And to do this they were going to create a simple villain. An imaginary enemy, one that would free them from the paralysing complexity of real Middle-Eastern politics. And the perfect candidate was waiting in the wings. Colonel Gaddafi, the ruler of Libya.

The Americans were going to ruthlessly use Colonel Gaddafi to create a fake terrorist mastermind. And Gaddafi was going to happily play along, because it would turn him into a famous global figure. Colonel Gaddafi had taken power in a coup in the 1970s but from the very start, he was convinced that he was more than just the leader of one country. He believed that he was an international revolutionary whose destiny was to challenge the power of the West.

When he was a young officer, Gaddafi had been sent to England for training and he had detested the patronising racism that he said he had found at the heart of British society. Once in power, Gaddafi had developed his own revolutionary theory, which he called the Third Universal Theory. It was an alternative, he said, to communism and capitalism. He published it in a green book, but practically no-one read it. He had sent money and weapons to the IRA in Ireland to help them overthrow the British ruling class. But all the other Arab leaders rejected him and his ideas. They thought that he was mad. And by the mid-1980s, Gaddafi was an isolated figure with no friends and no global influence.

Then, suddenly, that changed. In December 1985, terrorists attacked Rome and Vienna airports simultaneously, killing 19 people, including five Americans. There was growing pressure on President Reagan to retaliate. President Reagan immediately announced that Colonel Gaddafi was definitely behind the attacks. But the European security services who investigated the attacks were convinced that Libya was not involved at all and that the mastermind behind the attacks was, in fact, Syria – that the terrorists had been directed by the Syrian intelligence agencies.

But what made it even more confusing was that although there seemed to be no evidence that Gaddafi had been behind the attacks, he made no attempt to deny the allegations. Instead, he went the other way and turned the crisis into a global drama, threatening suicide attacks against America.

Gaddafi now started to play a role that was going to become very familiar. He grabbed the publicity that had been given to him by the Americans and used it dramatically. He promoted himself as an international revolutionary who would help to liberate oppressed peoples around the world, even the blacks in America.

The Americans and Gaddafi now became locked together in a cycle of mutual reinforcement. In the process, a powerful new image was created that was going to capture the imagination of the West. Gaddafi became a global supervillain, at the head of what was called a “rogue state” – a madman who threatened the stability of the world. And Gaddafi was loving every minute of it.

Then, there was another terrorist attack at a discotheque in West Berlin. A bomb killed an American soldier and injured hundreds. The Americans released what they said were intercepts by the National Security Agency that proved that Colonel Gaddafi was behind the bombing and a dossier that they said proved that he was also the mastermind behind a whole range of other attacks. President Reagan ordered the Pentagon to prepare to bomb Libya. But again, there were doubts – this time, within the American Government itself. There were concerns that analysts were being pressured to make a case that didn’t really exisτ, and to do it, they were taking Gaddafi’s rhetoric about himself as a global revolutionary and his manic ravings and then re-presenting them as fact. And, in the process, together, the Americans and Gaddafi were constructing a fictional world.

The European intelligence agencies told the Americans that they were wrong, that it was Syria that was behind the bombing, not Libya. But the Americans had decided to attack Libya because they couldn’t face the dangerous consequences of attacking Syria. Instead, they went for Gaddafi, a man without friends or allies.

In April 1986, the Americans attacked Libya. Their targets included Colonel Gaddafi’s own house. Immediately after the attack, Gaddafi appeared in the ruins to describe what had happened. Many other children were killed in the raid because the American bombing was so inaccurate. Gaddafi realised that the attention of the whole world was now focused on him and he grabbed the moment to promote his own revolutionary theory, The Third Way, as a global alternative to democracy.

President Assad didn’t want stability. He wanted revenge. In December 1988, a bomb exploded on a Pan Am plane over Lockerbie in Scotland. Almost immediately, investigators and journalists pointed the finger at Syria. “The bombing had been done,” they said, “in revenge for the Americans “shooting down an Iranian airliner in the Gulf a few months before.” And for 18 months, everyone agreed that this was the truth. But then, a strange thing happened. The security agencies said that they had been wrong. It hadn’t been Syria at all. It was Libya who had been behind the Lockerbie bombing. But many journalists and politicians did not believe it. They were convinced that the switch had happened for the most cynical of reasons. That America and Britain desperately needed Assad as an ally in the coming Gulf War against Saddam Hussein. So, once again, they blamed Colonel Gaddafi as the terrorist mastermind.

The attacks in September 2001 were suicide bombs, but now on a huge scale. They demonstrated the terrifying power of this new force to penetrate all defences. They had come to kill thousands of Americans on their own soil. 20 years before, President Reagan had been confronted by the first suicide bombers. They had been unleashed by President Assad of Syria to force America out of the Middle East. But rather than confront the complexity of Syria and Israel and the Palestinian problem, America had retreated and left Syria – and suicide bombing – to fester and mutate. They had gone instead for Colonel Gaddafi and turned him into an evil global terrorist. And after 9/11, this led to a new, and equally simple, idea. That if only you could remove these tyrannical figures, then the grateful people of their country would transform naturally into a democracy, because they would be free of the evil.

Both Tony Blair and George Bush became possessed by the idea of ridding the world of Saddam Hussein. So possessed that they believed any story that proved his evil intentions. And the line between reality and fiction became ever more blurred.

Iraq was imploding. While, at home, they were being accused of lying to their own people to justify the invasion. What they desperately needed was something that would show that the invasion was having a good effect in the Arab world. So, they made an extraordinary decision. They turned for help to the man who they had always insisted was one of the world’s most dangerous tyrants: Colonel Gaddafi. And, instead, they set out to make him their new best friend. A man who had been created by the West as a fake global supervillain was now going to be turned into a fake hero of democracy. And everyone, not just politicians, would become involved. Public relations, academics, television presenters, spies, and even musicians were all going to help reinvent Colonel Gaddafi. It would show just how many people in the Western Establishment had, by now, become the engineers of this fake world.

Colonel Gaddafi confirmed that Libya has, in the past, sought to develop weapons-of-mass-destruction capabilities. Libya has now declared its intention to dismantle its weapons of mass destruction completely. Colonel Gaddafi now became, for Western politicians, a heroic figure. His decision to give up his weapons of mass destruction seemed to prove that the invasion of Iraq could transform the Middle East. And Tony Blair travelled to meet Gaddafi in his desert tent. To welcome him back into what one journalist called, “The community of civilised nations.” But, as in the past, nothing was what it seemed with Colonel Gaddafi.

In reality, Gaddafi did not really have the terrifying weapons of mass destruction that he was promising to destroy. His nuclear programme had stuttered to a halt long ago and never produced anything dangerous. But now, he had to pretend to have a terrifying arsenal of weapons. And the West had to pretend that they had avoided another global threat.

And then the made-up stories became even more complicated. As part of the deal, the West said that if Gaddafi admitted that Libya had done the Lockerbie bombing, then they would lift the sanctions. But many of those who had investigated Lockerbie were still convinced that Libya hadn’t done it. That, really, it had been Syria. But Colonel Gaddafi confessed. His son, Saif, was interviewed about this confession. He said that his father was simply pretending that he had been behind the Lockerbie bombing to get the sanctions lifted. That new lies were being built on top of old lies to construct a completely make-believe world.



So, the Western hypocrites eventually decided that puppet Gaddafi should change role and become again the 'bad guy'. Do not forget what Hillary Clinton said when Gaddafi brutally murdered: 'We came, we saw, he died'. You know the rest: Libya sunk in chaos, but the neocolonial hyenas didn't care that much. They just started a race for country's resources on behalf of their beloved corporate monsters.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Former Pentagon official confirms: Trump prepares for war with Iran

globinfo freexchange
Right after Trump's sudden announcement that he will withdraw the US forces from Syria, we had some mixed reactions. Some liberals reacted angrily, but most of the reactions from the liberal machine were rather moderate, or at least not as intensive as someone would normally expect.
On the other hand, Trump's supporters and all those who had enough of the pro-war neoliberal establishment, felt a kind of vindication, as it appeared that Trump would eventually keep its promise for an 'anti-interventionist' policy.
But the blog wrote immediately a 'not so fast' article to explain that most of the Americans and all those who are tired of the US endless wars, should not rush to celebrate. We estimated that Trump's move is probably a sign that he is going to re-organize troops and go after the big target called Iran.
Indeed, shortly after the move, Trump, suddenly again, announced that he will also pullout troops from Afghanistan.
And then, about…

Panicked neoliberal tools attempt to trigger a war of generations against AOC's progressive counterattack

globinfo freexchange
We were slightly surprised to see such an article title in one of the primary info tools of the global neoliberal regime and financial capital. But the subtitle immediately clarified everything.
When we read the title “Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and the Revenge of the Millennials” of the article in Bloomberg, we thought that we might be in front of a small miracle. We thought that the time has come for some people inside the core of the establishment apparatus to admit that the younger generations have lost dramatically from this brutal system. And so, the time has come to overthrow it, take their 'revenge'.
But no, it was too good to be true.
The subtitle immediately revealed the trick: “The Democrats’ major economic initiatives tend to favor the young at the expense of the old.”
Then, inside the article we read: “Almost every major new economic initiative proposed by Democrats — the Green New Deal, Medicare for all, debt-free college — has a common feature: Un…

Confirmed: Germany builds its own imperialist empire

globinfo freexchange
Almost two years ago we identified Germany's efforts to develop its military in the context of its ambition to build its own sphere of influence.
As we wrote, Brexit will give the chance to Germany to increase influence due to the change of power balance, especially now that France appears weak - crawling behind Berlin's austerity, sado-monetarism and neoliberal destruction. These conditions (created in the Greek experiment), are necessary to Germany in order to retain a model in favor of its surpluses. These could become the solid ground upon which Germany could build a strong, modern military machine.
Therefore, Merkel knows that the economic domination is not adequate for a country to become a major power. It is also important to have a strong military presence in its “sphere of influence”, or, its financial/debt colonies, if you prefer. The German military presence in Lithuania is a first step towards this direction as the Baltic countries have already be…

The desperate efforts of the Western neoliberal establishment to build a new propaganda machine

globinfo freexchange
The UK government and other Western governments and the US in recent years have had increasing difficulties persuading enough of their populations as to the legitimacy of the foreign policies that they have been pursuing.
And at the same time, Western countries have been going through a period of political crisis and economic crisis.
Piers Robinson, Chair in Politics, Society and Political Journalism at the University of Sheffield, further explains:
I think a lot of this drive is as much about trying to shore up shaky official narratives and trying to shore up political systems in a situation of political crisis, as it is actually about countering Russian propaganda.
I would suspect that that's a little bit of an excuse here to really what's going on of problems much closer to home.
This is not just to do to UK, this is Europe-wide. And there are also indications from the documents that they are intending to start to have some kind of impact within the United…

WikiLeaks disturbing and hopeful findings on Tulsi Gabbard's path to progressiveness

The definite detachment from the Clintonian machine
globinfo freexchange
Searching the Podesta emails inside WikiLeaks we found a rather disturbing fact about Tulsi Gabbard who recently announced that she will run for the 2020 US presidency. Iraq War Veteran, Jon Soltz, chairman at VoteVets at the time, sent an email on Aug. 2012 to Hillary Clinton top lobbyist, John Podesta, in order to thank him for his contribution to Gabbard's campaign in Hawaii.
Soltz wrote (emphasis added):
This morning, we are one step closer to making history. In Hawaii, VoteVets PAC-endorsed Iraq veteran Tulsi Gabbard has won her primary, in a stunning come-from-behind victory. If she wins in November, she along with Tammy Duckworth (who we also feel very good about), would be the first female combat veteran ever elected to Congress in United States history! This is happening because of you. Your tens of thousands of dollars in donations for Tulsi's campaign, through VoteVets PAC, allowed her to run a fir…

The difference between Bernie Sanders and Jeremy Corbyn and what the US elections won't allow you to decide

globinfo freexchange
A country that has been completely taken over by the banking mafia and the corporate power will never allow people to decide on the most important issue: the abolition of the dominant system that works against them.
Professor Richard Wolff explains:
Because of Bernie Sanders, particularly, we now have the word Socialism floating around, but typically it's about, more or less, really among Democrats. Like Mr. Sanders is ambiguously an independent but he's also a Democrat.
So, the ‘Socialists’ seemed to be the Democrats who want to do more for people. Social welfare, social supports, state supports, versus those who don't want to do quite so much - the centrist Democrats, like Clinton and Obama.
But the real question is a program of change. Socialism is a change of system it goes away from capitalism to do something else. It would be interesting if we could have an election ‘do we want that?’, ‘would we like a different system?’.
There are countries doing t…

The IMF is dismantling Argentina all over again

Part 1
In September, Argentine president Mauricio Macri accepted the 2018 Atlantic Council’s Global Citizen Award. In attendance were many of world’s neoliberal power players and policy makers, among them International Monetary Fund (IMF) Managing Director Christine Lagarde.
Facing the crowd, Macri gleefully admitted that “with Christine, I have to confess we started a great relationship some months ago,” referring to a series of loan agreements with the IMF amounting to $57.1 billion dollars. “I expect that this is going to work very well, and we will end up with the whole country crushing on Christine,” he continued.
This dynamic of chasing an improved image with the world’s big banks and the dominant economies in the West is emblematic of Macri’s priority to secure a relationship with the IMF and improve the country’s image with global financial institutions. But it comes at a devastating cost for the majority of the population who will suffer from neoliberal policy prescriptions of…

How neoliberalism manufactured consent to secure its unlimited power

From David Harvey's A Brief History of Neoliberalism
Part 11 – The Reagan/Thatcher neoliberal legacy: a bizarre form of a sinister political doctrine from which it would be difficult one to escape
But Thatcher had to fight the battle on other fronts. A noble rearguard action against neoliberal policies was mounted in many a municipality –– Sheffield, the Greater London Council (which Thatcher had to abolish in order to achieve her broader goals in the 1980s), and Liverpool (where half the local councillors had to be gaoled) formed active centres of resistance in which the ideals of a new municipal socialism (incorporating many of the new social movements in the London case) were both pursued and acted upon until they were finally crushed in the mid-1980s.
She began by savagely cutting back central government funding to the municipalities, but several of them responded simply by raising property taxes, forcing her to legislate against their right to do so. Denigrating the progressive…

Banishing Truth

by Chris Hedges
The investigative reporter Seymour Hersh, in his memoir “Reporter,” describes a moment when as a young reporter he overheard a Chicago cop admit to murdering an African-American man. The murdered man had been falsely described by police as a robbery suspect who had been shot while trying to avoid arrest. Hersh frantically called his editor to ask what to do.
The editor urged me to do nothing,” he writes. “It would be my word versus that of all the cops involved, and all would accuse me of lying. The message was clear: I did not have a story. But of course I did.” He describes himself as “full of despair at my weakness and the weakness of a profession that dealt so easily with compromise and self-censorship.
Hersh, the greatest investigative reporter of his generation, uncovered the U.S. military’s chemical weapons program, which used thousands of soldiers and volunteers, including pacifists from the Seventh-day Adventist Church, as unwitting human guinea pigs to measure…

All the right progressives are running for 2020 ... but they need a really smart strategy to have a chance against the neoliberal beast

globinfo freexchange
More than a year ago we wrote that the 2016 electoral process in the US was particularly useful because it highlighted many interesting unprecedented aspects. One of them, is that you don't need the mainstream media to promote you. Especially the young Americans discovered and promoted Bernie Sanders through the independent and social media on the Internet. Another aspect, is that you don't need big money to support you. These new conditions could be proven valuable towards the creation of a third political movement, coming straight from the people, which could seriously challenge the current corrupted political establishment.
We also wrote that we can think at least four progressives that should join forces to lead such a political movement right now: Jill Stein, Bernie Sanders, Tulsi Gabbard, Elizabeth Warren.
Three of them already revealed their intention to run for the 2020 US presidency. Assuming that the Greens won't change leadership, Jill Stein wi…