In Libya, There are No Good Guys

The situation in Libya is an excellent case study for those of us who are trying to figure out how the United States Government actually conducts its foreign policy. Knowing the bare bones facts keeps us from being manipulated with propaganda. Let me just start with some bullet-points of things I recall seeing these last few months and then we can try to piece them together to get a cohesive explanation on what is going on:

• Anne Marie "Slaughter goes on to use the “Arab Spring” as proof positive the new foreign policy paradigm is effective. She mentions her two days spent at the corporate-funded Personal Democracy Forum, which included bloggers and organizers from the contrived “Arab Spring.” She notes that other participants included “government officials, corporate executives, and the civic sector.” She claims the six months of unrest in the streets as a result of this “new foreign policy” has accomplished more than 30 years of traditional “foreign policy.”  -- From a Tony Cartlucci article I quoted on another post.
• The Libyan "rebels" are being helped by Al-Qaeda according to the London Telegraph. Isn't Al-Qaeda the enemy of the United States, or is this an enemy of my enemy is my friend kind of thing?
  

  Even though the LIFG is not part of the al-Qaeda organisation, the United States military's West Point academy has said the two share an "increasingly co-operative relationship". In 2007, documents captured by allied forces from the town of Sinjar, showed LIFG emmbers made up the second-largest cohort of foreign fighters in Iraq, after Saudi Arabia.
  Earlier this month, al-Qaeda issued a call for supporters to back the Libyan rebellion, which it said would lead to the imposition of "the stage of Islam" in the country.

  Isn't that special? Does it bother the neocons that the American military is fighting alongside our sworn enemy, Al Qaeda? When narratives collide, bizarre things happen.
   

•  Wesley Clark said that Libya has been on the list for awhile now, in his own words describing what he was told while in the Pentagon following 9/11:  "So I came back to see him [a high ranking military officer in the Pentagon] a few weeks later, and by that time we were bombing in Afghanistan. I said, Are we still going to war with Iraq? And he said, Oh, it’s worse than that.I just got this down from upstairs — meaning the Secretary of Defense’s office — today. And he said, This is a memo that describes how we’re going to take out seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran." Now some of you might be thinking Wesley Clark is a wussy and all, but much of what he says here has played out. (h/t End of History)

• Obama gets his authority for going into Libya from the UN. That right there shows you where we are at. Those who mock Ron Paul for his foreign policy ought to be aware that the only difference between Obama and previous administrations is that now this is out in the open regarding where the foreign policy is coming from. Students of bankster funding know the score here. Ron Paul has this crazy thought that the US military ought to defend the United States, not the interests of the the banksters, which is what it has been used for in the last several decades according to just about every intelligence and military official who hasn't been bought off with board directorships and cushy jobs. So we've got a guy blatantly flipping off the Constitution, which is just an "in your face" what you goin' do 'bout it little guy situation. We've got an all out case of HIGH TREASON - transferring the power of the people to a foreign power. All bets are off, ready yourself for UN peacekeeping stormtroopers Red Dawn, etc.This kind of thing was kicked off by Truman with Korea, but anyway.
• Mummar Quadaffi is an ugly cuss:

 But you know what? Its true he's been the lord and master of his own personal tyranny. Seems like the banksters would love a guy like that. And you know what? They kind of did. While using the US military on "humanitarian missions" 'round the globe to go after human rights violators, the banksters let Quadaffi carry on with their blessing for 42 years But he messed up by trying to get Africa united under a single currency. Man, you don't mess with the banksters' bread and live to tell about it. If anyone is going to collectivize Africa under a single currency, it's going to be the bankster-run UN, World Bank, IMF, BIS etc. You know who I'm talking about.

• Isn't it weird that the Lockerbie bomber wasn't beheaded in the Tower of London, but was sent home to his native Libya to die of cancer, but then didn't and was able to celebrate an Allah-palooza Libyan-style. I'm sure there is a whole other story there.
• The National Transitional Council or the "rebel government" stops their rebelling mid-rebellion and set up a central bank! This is what we call a bankster fingerprint. Oh, and they are drafting a Shariah-based Constitution, isn't that special? (h/t Thoughts from a Conservative Mom) I think finding the links between Shariah and banksters is an area ripe for blogfodder. I think we would discover many revelations that would cause a lot of us to reevaluate our political paradigms. Shariah is like socialism in that it is a way to consolidate and stow away money and power.

What we've got here is a little boss (I'm using final fantasy terminology here) like in the bottom level of the castle being squashed by the bosses at the top of the tower after messing with their money. As you go up the power ladder, we see more and more centralized monied interests. What's worse is that they are using our servicemen to carry this crap out as they will not be caught with their hands all bloody. I'm seriously over this and want our troops back home to protect us from the TSA, the Green Police, the drug cartels, and other real and present dangers. Ron Paul is the only candidate who is saying that the United States armed forces should be used to protect the sovereignty of our nation, not be used as a paid merc army for the UN. And when you peel back the onion layers of just about every military engagement of the last 60 years, you see that it was all about the money.

Does anyone have other nuggets of Libyan interest to add?