Share on Google Plus Share on Twitter
  6
Share on Facebook
  9
Share on LinkedIn Share on PInterest Share on Fark! Share on Reddit Share on StumbleUpon Tell A Friend
  2
17 Shares     
Printer Friendly Page Save As Favorite View Favorites View Article Stats
9 comments

OpEdNews Op Eds

China Gave Go-Ahead for Neocolonial Capitalist Destruction of Socialist Libya Why? Part I

Become a Fan
  (35 fans)
By (about the author)     Permalink       (Page 1 of 3 pages)
Related Topic(s): ; ; ; ; , Add Tags Add to My Group(s)

Must Read 1   Well Said 1   Valuable 1  
View Ratings | Rate It

Headlined to H3 5/9/11

opednews.com




The UN Security Council by Eric D


We all held our breath. TV cameras were trained on the Chinese Ambassador to the United Nations. As the "Those against?" vote was called, peace loving people watched with a sinking feeling in their stomachs as the ambassador's hand remained on his desk.

In our mind's eye we saw the warplanes of yet another coalition of white colonial  powers bombing Africa, U.S. ships firing canons and missiles, Libyans being killed and maimed and radioactivity from uranium tipped missiles, shells and bullets infecting genes for generations to come producing cancerous death and inhuman like deformities in the new born.

China had given the go ahead for the military might of the now neocolonial powers to blast away at their former colony which had raised its standard of living to a  level higher than nine European nations including Russia.(1)

The Chinese Ambassador, with all the third world watching, doomed to brutal destruction and recolonization, a socialist country providing free health care and free higher education in a beautiful and well kept land.


CNN, New York Times and the rest of the corporatocracy media cartel made sure no mention was every made of Libya's enviable success, which placed it 53rd highest nation in the 2010 UN Human Development Index and far and away #1 in Africa.(1)

The huge sinister Pied Piper of the Global Village, the America-über-alles media cartel, was busy panning off vicious heavily armed gangs with overseas supervision as peaceful demonstrators. Bu these as "protesters' who had no living condition grievance, no complaint of hunger, poor health care or poverty because of exploitation by the rich and foreign banks, no reason to protest, apart from a nine millennium tradition of rivalry between Cyrenaica and Tripoli - a rivalry being stimulated with organized violence by nefarious international corporate interests.(2)

It is now the month of May and even before Socialist Libya has been conquered, boldly, not even bothering to stay behind the scenes, the same amoral racist businessmen types of past centuries of colonialism, power mad unscrupulous manipulators of private investment financial capital, speak of arrangements to divide up the loot and opportunities to capitalize on.(3)

The Chinese, unlike most of us following closely, were, without doubt, fully aware of the intentions of the financial rulers of the gangster imperialist nations, the speculating plunderers of the world, to again use their military to extend U.S. hegemony.

Yet even that constantly repeated pathetic media manufactured lie, "protect the civilians from their own government" being used as the pretext for war, was, in the end, repeated as well by the Chinese ambassador as China's reason for only abstaining rather than vetoing with a no vote consistent with China's principle of non-intervention in the affairs of other nations (referred to in the opening of the ambassador's explanation of it's vote). In addition, China had an opportunity to vote in accordance with the founding principle of the United Nations being disregarded and violated by those voting in favor.

Why? Why no Chinese veto? And why did the Chinese ambassador, embarrassingly, repeat a base, obvious, deceitful and almost absurd deception meant to protect the attacking rebels, not civilians.

China might have just as well voted yes, for its abstention produced the same result - a blanket attack. The wording of the resolution gave free reign to any and all military action to achieve the that "no-fly zone' the fig leaf covering an evil to be unleashed, yet again, in the name of the United Nations.  

But why? China has extensive energy investments and construction investments in Libya, 50 major investment projects are in eastern Libya. Chinese companies are losing hundreds of millions of dollars from this intervention. Last year China had $6.6 billion worth of trade with Libya, most of  it in oil. China is looking to Africa as a future energy source, and the Gaddafi led government had favored China in oil export. Libya's was creating gold dinars (Libya is estimated by the U.S. Treasury, to have 44 tons of  gold) to use in place of dollars and euros and avoid the clipping of the central banking system in Europe, the tool of mega speculators. Was this not the kind of  currency change China has expressed great interest in? Also Libya, under Gaddafi, had not joined the US Africa Command (USAC) by contributing troops as had a number of nations of Sahara/Sahel region, indicating that Libya might be a bulwark against USAC managing to gain US control over African oil exportation to exclude China.(4) 

Why was China giving up so much? Had China been made an offer it couldn't refuse or was this imperialism supporting acquiescent vote, beyond comprehension and seemingly against China's own interests, in line with some long range Realpolitik that one could expect to  understand in the future?

China lovers were instantly stumped into incomprehension, bewilderment,  dismayed, betrayed, the rug pulled out from underneath their feet. Their confidence lost that the fifth of Mankind with wisdom gained during five thousand years of practical living would protect the rest of us from the insanely barbaric, homicidal imperialism wrought by predatory capitalism that had colonized the whole nonwhite world, including China. This confidence or hope was now destroyed with our witnessing China going along with a classic example of false flag violence fostering a civil war in the age old imperialist principle of divide and conquer. [See author's OEN and CounterCurrents published comprehensive review of all reporting on the violence in Libya from February 15 through April 26](2)
 
Speaking before the UN General Assembly in 2009, Gaddafi, had called the Security Council a "Terror Council" for the sixty-five wars it has failed to prevent, even approving participating in most of them. How prophetic for what would come his way so soon.

Next Page  1  |  2  |  3

 

Take action -- click here to contact your local newspaper or congress people:
Write and speak up, even to family and friends if you are aware of the investment capital's drive towards a major war for US totaly hegemony

Click here to see the most recent messages sent to congressional reps and local newspapers

http://prosecuteuscrimesagainsthumanitynow.blogspot.com

Jay Janson is an archival research peoples historian activist, musician and writer; has lived and worked on all continents; articles on media published in China, Italy, UK, India and the US; now resides in NYC; First effort was a series of articles (more...)
 
Share on Google Plus Submit to Twitter Add this Page to Facebook! Share on LinkedIn Pin It! Add this Page to Fark! Submit to Reddit Submit to Stumble Upon

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Follow Me on Twitter

Contact Author Contact Editor View Authors' Articles

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

What Tony Bennett Said About 9/11 Martin Luther King Jr. Would Have Also

Girlfriends? Petraeus Oversaw the Slaughter of Thousands and He Will Face Trial:

U.S. Threat to Atom Bomb North Korea Never Forgotten

NINE BRUTAL DISAPPOINTMENTS FOR US OBAMA FANS

English Capitalists Starved Millions of Irish to Death For Profit - George Bernard Shaw

Demonic David Rockefeller Fiends Dulles Kissinger Brzezinski - Investor Wars Korea thru Syria

Comments

The time limit for entering new comments on this article has expired.

This limit can be removed. Our paid membership program is designed to give you many benefits, such as removing this time limit. To learn more, please click here.

Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
5 people are discussing this page, with 9 comments
To view all comments:
Expand Comments
(Or you can set your preferences to show all comments, always)

Interest in any topic related to the violence in L... by Jay Janson on Monday, May 9, 2011 at 12:48:51 PM
As the U.S. military is puling out of Iraq and (pe... by Marcel Bartels on Monday, May 9, 2011 at 8:55:26 PM
Wow, great work of fiction and crystal-ball scryin... by Mac McKinney on Monday, May 9, 2011 at 9:08:39 PM
Will look forward to his comments.Actually, would ... by Jay Janson on Monday, May 9, 2011 at 9:12:31 PM
Thanks for appreciation. Here are some quotes of t... by Marcel Bartels on Tuesday, May 10, 2011 at 9:42:17 AM
"Socialist Libya"? "China lovers"?Stumped indeed.... by Jim Arnold on Monday, May 9, 2011 at 9:54:37 PM
China is playing its cards very close to its chest... by Doc McCoy on Monday, May 9, 2011 at 11:21:45 PM
Doc, You've given an excellent analysis of China's... by Jim Arnold on Tuesday, May 10, 2011 at 10:30:33 AM
Didn't mean to make Part 2 obsolete. :{]No matter... by Doc McCoy on Wednesday, May 11, 2011 at 12:01:20 AM