When it comes to Libya, there are so many problems with the latest “movie of reality” coming from the mainstream media it’s becoming farcical. It’s as if the writers in the Ministry of Information are penning their propaganda in a vacuum, oblivious to the increasingly obvious inconsistencies and absurdities in what they say. Dissecting the “narrative” that the public are expected to swallow as “fact” reveals a plot as nonsensical as a badly made straight-to-DVD political thriller.
First, they told us Gaddafi was slaughtering civilians, accusing him of using his air force to strafe and murder protestors. The International Criminal Court called for his immediate extradition, yet failed to provide any compelling evidence to back up their accusations. Regardless of this, UN Resolution 1973 was passed enforcing a NATO “no-fly zone” over Libya which promptly initiated the murder by bombs of the very civilians NATO claimed to be protecting from Gaddafi. Of course, by the time Operation Odyssey Dawn unleashed NATO’s bombers on Libya, British MI6 officers along with SAS soldiers had already been caught in the country attempting to influence anti-Gaddafi forces.
The propaganda over Gaddafi and Libya, while similar to that in the build up to the invasion of Iraq in many respects (claims that the action was a “humanitarian intervention”, the demonization of the leader-figure, formerly enthusiastically supported now “out of favour” and so on), is quite different in another: while it simplifies geopolitics and war to the predictable black and white/good and evil, this time, the “good” is being represented as an indigenous “rebel alliance” fighting the “evil” Gaddafi, who we just happen to be supporting. One function of this is clear: to dampen the awareness that yet another front has opened up in an ever-widening theatre of war, creating the impression that situation in Libya is a legitmate uprising in which NATO are simply fulfilling their UN mandate of protecting civilians, while conveniently providing “support” for anti-Gaddafi forces.
These “anti-Gaddafi forces” have dominated the footage from Libya presented by the mainstream media. While the BBC and others would have us believe they are the Libyan “good guys”, the reality is that they are a mixture of special forces soldiers from a number of countries – British SAS, US Navy SEALs, French Legionnaires – working with CIA sponsored Islamic brigades and the Libya Islamic fighting Group (LIFG), closely affiliated with al-Qaeda. The media would have the public believe that these “good guys” – known terrorists and extremists, some of whom have a background of fighting Western forces in Iraq and Afghanistan – will effect a smooth transition to democracy in Libya.
The true nature of the “rebels” isn’t the only thing the media has lied about with regards to Libya; the whereabouts of Colonel Gaddafi has been a source of much baseless speculation and reporting. Even before the NATO assault began, British Foreign Secretary William Hague was informing EU ministers that Gaddafi had fled to Venezuela. This turned out to be a lie. In May, more reports came out stating that his family had fled to Tunisia. Just as the Venezualan’s denied the earlier reports, so too did the Tunis authorities deny these reports. More recent reports would have us all believe that Gaddafi has fled the country once again, this time heading for Zimbabwe, seeking the protection of Robert Mugabe. Other news reports state that his family has fled to Algeria; still more insist that he is heading for exile in Angola. It’s difficult to ascertain whether the media is plain incompetent when it comes to checking their facts or suffering from acute amnesia, incapable of recalling events they’ve reported on previously and thus oblivious to their contradictions and inconsistencies.
But “Gaddafi: The Movie” goes well beyond simply reporting speculation as fact, which, let’s face it, is a daily event for the mainstream media. More recently, the presstitutes have once again demonstrated that they are capable of going to much greater lengths to peddle propaganda to the public. On 24th August, BBC Breakfast took their audiences live to Green Square in Tripoli to show them the “huge throng of people” turning out in “jubilation” – all very exciting stuff, except the footage they played was from India:
Not to be outdone by the BBC, Al-Jazeera went one step further. For their coverage of the capture of Tripoli by the “rebels” they built an entire set of Green Square and enacted scenes of rebels celebrating their “victory”. Unfortunately for them, the set builders lacked an eye for detail and comparisons between their footage and the real location showed up some revealing inconsistencies:
As with so many other aspects of the propaganda over Libya, there are striking similarities with the propaganda dished out by the mainstream media during the invasion and occupation of Iraq, where the line between “news” reporting and military psychological operations becomes increasingly blurred:
As with the mainstream reporting from Iraq, most of the Western press are “embedded” with the CIA/MI6-backed “rebels” and their reporting reflects an obvious bias towards their viewpoint. There have even been reports suggesting that some journalists themselves are in fact CIA agents posing as reporters staying at the Rixos Hotel in Tripoli, as French investigative reporter Thierry Meyssan told Russia Today:
And, just like with Iraq, journalists not afforded the “protection” of Western forces are finding themselves increasingly in danger of losing their lives. Thierry Meyssan and Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya have received death threats: as this bulletin from Global Research points out, “The atmosphere within the media centre of the Rixos Hotel in Tripoli must be understood. The mainstream media, including CNN and the BBC have direct links to NATO, the Transitional Council and Rebel Forces. They are serving NATO interests in a direct way through massive media distortion. At the same time, those within the Rixos Media Centre who are committed to the truth are the the object of veiled threats. Those who say the truth are threatened. Those who lie and accept the NATO consensus, their lives will be protected. NATO special forces operating within rebel ranks will ensure their safety.”
So the violence continues, with the SAS leading the rebels, dressed in Arab civilian clothing, echoing previous operations in Basra in which British SAS soldiers were caught provocateuring, posing as “insurgents”. Iraq was successfully destabilised, the country now in ruins from which recovery will take decades while Western corporations continue to rape the country of its resources. NATO, it seems, is keen to set Libya on the same path before the UN Mandate expires on September 27th; the influx of foreign fighters, al Qaeda operatives and CIA front men seemingly destined to plunge the country into civil war.
The path to World War 3 continues unabated.