Libya : A no lie zone

[Peter Lemkin]

DU is good for your health...and other living things...you must be anti-American :pinkelephant:

[Jan Klimkowski]

Sniff sniff...

Is that the stench of the corpse of spook bank Nugan Hand, (famed for arms trafficking and money laundering), transported to the desert sands of Libya with help from "plausibly deniable" Langley hands turned private entrepreneurs, that I'm smelling here?

How do you spell Bank Shackley Wilson in Arabic? :mexican:

[Peter Lemkin]

Sniff sniff...

Is that the stench of the corpse of spook bank Nugan Hand, (famed for arms trafficking and money laundering), transported to the desert sands of Libya with help from "plausibly deniable" Langley hands turned private entrepreneurs, that I'm smelling here?

How do you spell Bank Shackley Wilson in Arabic? :mexican:

Interesting speculation, Jan - and not a long stretch. Who in the world thinks much about looking at, thinking about, monitoring activities of the Bank of Libya - virtually no one. It is likely controlled by a handful [or less] persons and opaque as stone. Terpil and Nugan both disappeared....wonder if they are on the board?

[Peter Lemkin]

Bank freed from US sanctions despite Libya's major stake :finger:

By KEVIN G. HALL
McClatchy Newspapers

WASHINGTON -- Although Libya's government and state oil sector are the targets of global sanctions, the U.S. Treasury Department has exempted from them a financial institution that's almost 60 percent owned by the Libyan Central Bank.

The Treasury Department on March 4 granted the Arab Banking Corporation an exemption to President Barack Obama's executive order authorizing sanctions on Libyan businesses. Last December, the Libyan central bank upped its ownership stake in that bank to 59.3 percent.

"It is business as usual at Arab Banking Corporation," the Bahrain-based bank says on its website in a bulletin published on March 6. The note states that the company is regulated in Bahrain - a U.S. ally in the Persian Gulf - and that the Kuwait Investment Authority, the overseas investment arm of the Kuwaiti government, another U.S. ally - owns a 29.6 percent stake in the bank.

The exemption from sanctions angered Sen. Bernie Sanders, an independent from Vermont and frequent critic of the Federal Reserve. In a Thursday letter sent to Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke and Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, Sanders alleged that the exemption "raises a number of critical questions" and suggested it might be aiding the regime of strongman Moammar Gadhafi.

"Why would the U.S. government exempt the Arab Banking Corporation from economic sanctions when it is primarily owned by the Central Bank of Libya? How many U.S. Treasury securities does the Arab Banking Corporation currently own?" Sanders asked in the letter. "How much money has the Federal Reserve lent to the Arab Banking Corporation since December 1, 2010?"

One reason Sanders asked about Fed lending to the bank is that data released as part of last year's legislation that revamped financial regulation showed that the Fed provided it at least 45 emergency low-interest loans during the U.S. financial crisis in 2007 and 2008. At that time, Libya's central bank had a one-third stake in Arab Banking Corporation, and the Fed was lending to foreign and domestic banks alike to try to stabilize the global financial system.

Fed officials had no immediate response to the Sanders letter, released late Thursday. A Treasury Department official, requesting anonymity in order to speak freely, said that the exemption sought to prevent "undo disruption to third-party commerce."

While Libya's central bank retains its majority ownership stake, the Arab Banking Corporation cannot do business with any Libyan government institution, the Treasury official said, and the central bank can't liquidate its stake since it has been sanctioned by the United States and European Union.

[Peter Lemkin]

Farhat Bengdara
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Farhat Omar Bengdara (Arabic: فرحات عمر بن قداره‎) is a Libyan politician and banker who is currently the governor of the Central Bank of Libya (CBL).

Bengdara has a B.A. in Economics from Garyounis University, Libya and a Master in Money, Banking and Finance from Sheffield University, UK.

Earlier, he acted as Deputy Governor of the CBL; Chairman and General Manager for the Public Furniture Company, Libya; and Deputy Chairman of Wahda Bank, Libya. Mr. Bengdara has been a Director of Arab Banking Corporation (ABC) since 2001 and has 18 years' experience in banking and other business sectors. Deputy Chairman of ABC in Egypt (S.A.E.) and Chairman of ABC International Bank plc, in London.[1] He is also a board member for the Libyan Investment Corporation. Furthermore, Mr. Bengdara has been board member and Vice-Chairman of UniCredit SpA* since April 29, 2009.

^ Annual Report 2001 Arab Banking Corporation

*UniCredit SpA (BIT: UCG, FWB: CRI) is an Italy-based, pan-European banking organization, with over 40 million customers and operations in 22 countries. The company has its registered office in Rome and general management in Milan.[2] UniCredit's core markets are Italy, Austria and Southern Germany, and it also has substantial operations in Central & Eastern Europe. The UniCredit Group has investment banking divisions in London, Milan, Munich, and Vienna.

[Where is Dave, when we really need his expertise?!......:captain:]

[Peter Lemkin]

America's Planned Nuclear Attack on Libya

by Prof. Michel Chossudovsky


Global Research, March 30, 2011

A war on Libya has been on the drawing board of the Pentagon for more than 20 years. Using nukes against Libya was first envisaged in 1997.

On April 14th 1986, Ronald Reagan ordered a series of bombings directed against Libya under "Operation El Dorado Canyon", in reprisal for an alleged Libya sponsored terrorist bombing of a Berlin discotheque. The pretext was fabricated. During these air raids, which were condemned by both France and Italy, Qadhafi's residence was bombed killing his younger daughter.


Barely acknowledged by the Western media, a planned attack on Libya using nuclear weapons, had been contemplated by the Clinton Administration in 1997, at the height of the Monica Lewinsky scandal.

The Department of Defense had developed a new generation of bunker buster tactical nuclear weapons for use in the Middle East and Central Asia:

"Military officials and leaders of America's nuclear weapon laboratories [had] urged the US to develop a new generation of precision low-yield nuclear weapons... which could be used in conventional conflicts with third-world nations." (Federation of American Scientists, 2001, emphasis added)







The B61-11 earth-penetrating weapon with a nuclear warhead had not been tested. It was part of the B61 series, coupled with a so-called "low yield" nuclear warhead. According to US military sources: "If used in North Korea, the radioactive fallout [of the B61-11] could drift over nearby countries such as Japan." (B61-11 Earth-Penetrating Weapon, Globalsecurity.org). The B61-11 earth-penetrating version of the B61 was configured initially to have a "low" 10 kiloton yield, 66.6 percent of a Hiroshima bomb, for post-Cold War battlefield operations in the Middle East and Central Asia.

The Pentagon's Plan to Nuke Libya

The B61-11 tactical nuclear weapon was slated by the Pentagon to be used in 1997 against the "Qadhafi regime":

"Senior Pentagon officials ignited controversy last April [1997] by suggesting that the earth-penetrating [nuclear] weapon would soon be available for possible use against a suspected underground chemical factory being built by Libya at Tarhunah. This thinly-veiled threat came just eleven days after the United States signed the African Nuclear Weapons Free Zone Treaty, designed to prohibit signatories from using or threatening to use nuclear weapons against any other signatory, including Libya." (David Muller, Penetrator N-Bombs, International Action Center, 1997)

Tarbunah has a population of more than 200,000 people, men, women and children. It is about 60 km East of Tripoli. Had this "humanitarian bomb" (with a "yield" or explosive capacity of two-thirds of a Hiroshima bomb) been launched on this "suspected" WMD facility, it would have resulted in tens of thousands of deaths, not to mention the nuclear fallout...

The man behind this diabolical project to nuke Libya was Assistant Secretary of Defense Harold Palmer Smith Junior. "Even before the B61 came on line, Libya was identified as a potential target". (Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists - September/ October 1997, p. 27, emphasis added)

Harold Palmer Smith had been appointed by President Bill Clinton to oversee nuclear, chemical, and biological defense programs with a focus on "the reduction and maintenance of the US arsenal of nuclear weapons". From the outset, his actual mandate, was not "reduce" but to "increase" the nuclear arsenal by promoting the development of a new generation of "harmless" mini-nukes for use in the Middle East war theater.


Harold Palmer Smith Junior

"Testing" the B611-11 Nuclear Bomb on an Actual Country

The Department of Defense's objective under Harold Smith's advice was to fasttrack the "testing" of the B61-11 nuclear bomb on an actual country:

Five months after [Assistant Defense Secretary] Harold Smith called for an acceleration of the B61-11 production schedule, he went public with an assertion that the Air Force would use the B61-11 [nuclear weapon] against Libya's alleged underground chemical weapons plant at Tarhunah if the President decided that the plant had to be destroyed. "We could not take [Tarhunah] out of commission using strictly conventional weapons," Smith told the Associated Press. The B61-11 "would be the nuclear weapon of choice," he told Jane's Defence Weekly.

Smith gave the statement during a breakfast interview with reporters after Defense Secretary William Perry had earlier told a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on chemical or biological weapons that the U.S. retained the option of using nuclear weapons against countries armed with chemical and biological weapons. (http://www.nukestrat.com/us/afn/B61-11.htm, emphasis added)

While the Pentagon later denied its intention to bomb Libya's Tarhunah plant, it nonetheless confirmed that "Washington would not rule out using nuclear weapons [against Libya]". (Ibid., emphasis added.)

Nukes and Mini-Nukes: Iraq and Afghanistan

The US military contends that "mini-nukes" are "humanitarian bombs" which minimize "collateral damage". According to scientific opinion on contract to the Pentagon, they are "harmless to the surrounding civilian population because the explosion is underground",

The B61-11 is a bon fide thermonuclear bomb, a Weapon of Mass Destruction (WMD) in the real sense of the word.

Military documents distinguish between the Nuclear Earth Penetrator (NEP) and the "mini-nuke", which are nuclear weapons with a yield of less than 10 kilotons (two-thirds of a Hiroshima bomb). The NEP can have a yield of up to a 1000 kilotons, or seventy times a Hiroshima bomb.

This distinction between mini-nukes and the NEP is in many regards misleading. In practice there is no dividing line. We are broadly dealing with the same type of weaponry: the B61-11 has several "available yields", ranging from "low yields" of less than one kiloton, to mid-range, and up to the 1000 kiloton bomb.

In all cases, the radioactive fallout is devastating. Moreover, the B61 series of thermonuclear weapons includes several models with distinct specifications: the B61-11, the B61-3, B61- 4, B61-7 and B61-10. Each of these bombs has several "available yields".

What is contemplated for theater use is the "low yield" 10 kt bomb, two-thirds of a Hiroshima bomb.

The Libya 1997 "Nuclear Option" had set the Stage...

Neither the Bush nor the Obama administrations have excluded using thermonuclear bunker buster bombs in the Middle East war theater. These weapons were specifically developed for use in post Cold War "conventional conflicts with third world nations". They were approved for use in the conventional war theater by the US Senate in 2002, following the adoption of the 2001 Nuclear Posture Review.

In October 2001, in the immediate wake of 9/11, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld envisaged the use of the B61-11 in Afghanistan. The stated targets were Al Qaeda cave bunkers in the Tora Bora mountains.

Rumsfeld stated at the time that while the "conventional" bunker buster bombs "'are going to be able to do the job'... he did not rule out the eventual use of nuclear weapons." (Quoted in the Houston Chronicle, 20 October 2001, emphasis added.)

The use of the B61-11 was also contemplated during the 2003 bombing and invasion of Iraq. In this regard, the B61-11 was described as "a precise, earth-penetrating low-yield nuclear weapon against high-value underground targets", which included Saddam Hussein's underground bunkers:

"If Saddam was arguably the highest value target in Iraq, then a good case could be made for using a nuclear weapon like the B61-11 to assure killing him and decapitating the regime." (Defense News, December 8, 2003, emphasis added)

"All options are on the table"... Sheer madness. Nukes to implement "regime change"... What Rumsfeld had proposed, as part of a "humanitarian mandate", was the use of a nuclear bomb to "take out" the president of a foreign country.

(author's note: There is no documentary evidence that the B61-11 was used against Iraq).

Is a Nuclear Attack on Libya Still on the Pentagon's Drawing Board?

"The Coalition of the Willing" under US-NATO mandate is currently involved in "a humanitarian war" on Libya to "protect the lives of innocent civilians".

Is the use of a nuclear bomb excluded under the Alliance's R2P Responsibility to Protect Doctrine?

The Bush administration's 2001 nuclear doctrine contained specific "guidelines" regarding "preemptive" nuclear strikes against several countries in the broader Middle East Central Asian region, which explictly included Libya.

As revealed by William Arkin in early 2002, "The Bush administration, in a secret policy review... [had] ordered the Pentagon to draft contingency plans for the use of nuclear weapons [The 2001 Nuclear Posture Review approved by the Senate in late 2002] against at least seven countries, naming not only Russia and the "axis of evil"--Iraq, Iran, and North Korea--but also China, Libya and Syria. (See William Arkin, "Thinking the Unthinkable", Los Angeles Times, 9 March 2002)

In addition, the U.S. Defense Department has been told to prepare for the possibility that nuclear weapons may be required in some future Arab-Israeli crisis. And, it is to develop plans for using nuclear weapons to retaliate against chemical or biological attacks, as well as "surprising military developments" of an unspecified nature. These and a host of other directives, including calls for developing bunker-busting mini-nukes and nuclear weapons that reduce collateral damage, are contained in a still-classified document called the Nuclear Posture Review (NPR), which was delivered to Congress on Jan. 8. (ibid)

The preemptive nuclear doctrine (DJNO) --endorsed by the Obama Administration-- allows for the preemptive use of "mini nukes" in conventional war theaters directed against "rogue states". While the "guidelines" do not exclude other (more deadly) categories of nukes in the US /NATO nuclear arsenal, Pentagon "scenarios" in the Middle East and North Africa are currently limited to the use of tactical nuclear weapons including the B61-11 bunker buster bomb.

The fact that Libya had been singled out by the Pentagon for a possible 1997 mini-nuke "trial run" was a significant element in the formulation of the 2001 Nuclear Posture Review (NPR).

It is worth noting that tactical B61 nuclear weapons have also been deployed by America's NATO partners: five European "non-nuclear states", including Belgium, The Netherlands and Italy, which are directly participating in the Libya bombing campaign, have B61 mini-nukes stockpiled and deployed under national command in their respective military bases. (Michel Chossudovsky, Europe's Five "Undeclared Nuclear Weapons States", February 10, 2010)

These European-based mini-nukes are earmarked for targets in the Middle East. While Libya is not mentioned, according to "NATO strike plans", the European-based thermonuclear B61 bunker buster bombs could be launched "against targets in Russia or countries in the Middle East such as Syria and Iran" (quoted in National Resources Defense Council, Nuclear Weapons in Europe, February 2005).

In the context of the ongoing war against Libya, "all options are on the table", including the preemptive nuclear option, as part of a "humanitarian mandate" to protect the lives of innocent civilians.

In 2007, a Secret 2003 STRATCOM Plan was revealed, which confirmed Washington's resolve to wage preemptive nuclear attacks against Iran, Syria and Libya. While the concepts and assumptions of this document were derived from the 2001 NPR, the Plan formulated by Strategic Command headquarters (USSTRATCOM) focused concretely on issues of implementation.

The use of nuclear weapons including the B61-11 against Libya in the course of the current military campaign, as initially envisaged by the Department of Defense in 1997 and subsequently embodied as the 2001 Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) cannot, therefore, be ruled out.

[Jan Klimkowski]

Former CIA counter-terrorism beard, Michael Scheuer, tells CNN live that the Libyan "rebels" are largely Mujahideen, and that the claims that this is a coalition/NATO humanitarian intervention is in reality a piece of political theatre to disguise a US-led intervention at the behest of Clinton, McCain and co....

CNN's plastic presenters panic, and Stepford Wives hysteria invades the MSM studio...

http://www.zerohedge.com/article/former-...ity-ensues

[Magda Hassan]

LOL Jan! Cognitive dissonance and panicked plastic Stepford Wives in the MSM on live tv. I'd love to see that :rocker:

Al Qaeda: Pawns of CIA Insurrection from Libya to YemenBy Webster G. Tarpley, Ph.D.
April 04, 2011 "Information Clearing House" -- After two weeks of imperialist attack, Libya is being mangled by Al Qaeda terrorists, civil war, NATO air raids, cruise missiles, Predator drones, and C-130 gunships all made possible by the CIA-backed Al Qaeda rebels of Cyrenaica. US, British, French, and Dutch commandos have taken leadership of the rebel forces, and are arming them with modern weapons in flagrant violation of the arms embargo specified in UN Security Council resolution 1973. Al Qaeda is also stealing heavy weapons on its own, as the president of Chad has reported. The singing tomorrows of the fatuous US-UK color revolution rhetoric have dissolved, exposing the hideous reality of a brutal, cynical, imperialist drive to destroy the modern nation-state itself.
Rebel Triumvirate of Terror Rules Darna

According to the London Daily Telegraph of March 26, Darna (also transliterated as Derna or Darnah), a key city in the rebel heartland between Benghazi in Tobruk, is commanded by al-Hasidi, an Al Qaeda terrorist controller who trained and hobnobbed with Osama bin Laden at the Khost terrorist training camp in Afghanistan. Hasidi boasts of having sent 25 fighters to fight US and NATO forces in Afghanistan; one wonders how many they managed to kill. Hasidi was a US prisoner of war after being captured by the Pakistanis, but tells the Wall Street Journal of April 2 that he now hates the US only "less than 50%" hinting that Americans can redeem themselves by appeasing Al Qaeda with arms, money, political power, and diplomatic support. At his side in the city leadership is Sufian bin Kumu, Osama bin Laden's chauffeur, another terrorist who was an inmate at Guantánamo Bay for six years. Also among the Darna city fathers is al-Barrani, a devoted member of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, which merged with Al Qaeda in 2007.
This gaggle of fanatics, psychotics, and criminals is billed by the CIA media as an effective ruling elite for the future democratic governance of Libya. In reality, the Benghazi rebel council, heavily larded with Al Qaeda terrorists, could only preside over the descent of the country into a chaos of tribalism, warlords, and criminal syndicates which would spell the end of civilization itself in the area. Precisely this appears to be the goal of US policy, and not just in Libya.
Darna, Northeast Libya: the World Capital of Terrorist Recruitment

Nor are these persons atypical. A December 2007 study by the US Military Academy at West Point showed that Libya (population 7 million) provided 20% of all Al Qaeda fighters crossing the Syrian border into Iraq at that time. This same city of Darna (population about 60,000) was the single greatest center of terrorist recruitment anywhere in the world, edging out Riyadh, Saudi Arabia (population 4.5 million); the rebel capital of Benghazi also placed in the top four. Libya sent twice as many terrorists into Iraq per capita as did Saudi Arabia, and 85% of the Libyans who indicated a specialty chose that of suicide bomber.
The London Economist, BBC Newsnight, and an increasing number of pro-Obama warmonger quackademics are attempting to obscure these plain facts. These are now mellow, pluralist, democratic terrorists, they argue. The CIA limited hangout operation known as Wikileaks has helpfully provided a few doctored cables purporting to show that it was really US support of Qaddafi that drove these fanatics into despair and terrorism which is also part of the CIA line. On April 1, the Benghazi rebels themselves used the media presence at Friday prayers to hold up signs denying that the rebellion is run by Al Qaeda. If so, let them oust the terror triumvirate of Darna, and reveal the names of the dozen or more anonymous members of the rebel council who are suspected of belonging to Al Qaeda.
Hillary Clinton concedes she has no "100% insight" into the rebels, and US Admiral Stavridis, the NATO commander, has told the Senate Armed Services Committee that he sees only "flickers" of Al Qaeda. In truth, the central role of Al Qaeda is no flicker, but is as bright as the noonday sun over the Mediterranean
Four Plagues of Libya

The Libyan insurrection has four components. The first is provided by the British, and consists of the monarchist and racist Harabi and Obeidat tribes of the Benghazi-Darna-Tobruk corridor, whose traditional culture is that of the obscurantist Senussi Order. During the resistance to Italian colonialism, these tribes allied with the British and were rewarded by seeing the head of the Senussi Order placed on the throne in the person of King Idris I, overthrown by Qaddafi in 1968. Deprived of their role as the monarchist ruling class, these tribes hate the black or dark-skinned pro-Qaddafi Fezzan tribes of southwest Libya, and this has fed into the lynching and massacre of many black Africans from Chad, Mali, and Sudan working in Libya, which the western media have ignored. Enan Obeidi, the woman who claims she was raped by Qaddafi forces, is an Obeidat from Benghazi, and this puts her story into question. For the media, she is a new edition of the Kuwait incubator babies hoax of 1990, made to order to whip up war hysteria against Qaddafi.
Two ingredients come from the CIA. These are Al Qaeda itself, founded as the CIA's own Arab Legion against the USSR by then CIA deputy director Robert Gates the current Defense Secretary in Afghanistan in 1981-82. Another CIA ingredient is the Libyan National Salvation Front, based first in Sudan and then in Northern Virginia, which is supposedly sending the CIA asset Khalifa Hifter to lead the rebel military, most likely also to cover the presence of the Al Qaeda types.
A fourth component is contributed by the French, who arranged the defection of top Qaddafi associate Nouri Mesmari last fall, as reported by Maghreb Confidential. A clique of generals around Mesmari helped foment the military mutinies against Qaddafi in northeast Libya.
And Libya is not unique. In Yemen, Al Qaeda operatives are decisive components of the CIA putsch attempt against President Saleh, which US is promoting in order to fragment Yemen into two or more rump states. Here the Al Qaeda leader is al-Shihri, a Saudi who was freed along with several other Guantánamo inmates and sent to Yemen by the Bush administration, allegedly as a humanitarian gesture, but in reality to provide leadership for the coming destabilization. Also in Yemen is the American-born Anwar Awlaki, known in the trade as Awlaki the CIA lackey, an obvious US double agent who has been used to give the Al Qaeda seal of approval to dozens of terrorists including the Fort Dix six, Major Hasan of Fort Hood, and Mutallab of Nigeria, the Christmas 2009 underwear bomber.
In Syria, the CIA goal is to deprive Iran of an ally, to isolate Hezbollah, to oust Russia from the Tartus naval station, and to build the power of the Muslim Brotherhood, which is the principal force promoting the insurrection so far.
Demand that the State Department Explain Why the US is Arming Al Qaeda Terrorists

Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan has rightly warned against the NATO policy of arming the Libyan rebels, since this would be "conducive to terrorism." Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov has also condemned any NATO arming of the rebels. Pope Benedict XVI's call for a cease-fire goes in the same direction. Russia, Turkey, China, and other governments must now formally demand explanations from the State Department as to why the US is providing the most dangerous international terrorists with modern weapons and training, while proposing to award them large chunks of the $32 billion of frozen Libyan government assets, plus a share in coming oil revenues. This is enough to make the Mediterranean, the Arab world, and southern Europe boil over with refugees, piracy, mayhem, and war.
Under Bush and Cheney, the alleged presence of Al Qaeda was used as a pretext for bombings and invasions. Under Obama, an overstretched and moribund US-UK imperialism is using Al Qaeda as its own irregular infantry in the effort to harass and cripple the nation-states of the world, causing them to disintegrate into a tribal, sectarian, criminal, and warlord chaos. In the current phase, Al Qaeda has resumed its original status as CIA guerrillas. As a result, civilization itself is threatened across vast areas of the globe. If you are skeptical, just take a look at the city council of Darna, Libya.

[Carsten Wiethoff]

Considering that he was conspicuously NOT mentioned as one to have their financial assets frozen, nor named as likely to be prosecuted by the ICC, it is my believe [at this time] that this 'defection' was planned a month ago, or more. And planned by both the Western Alliance [US/UK/NATO/UN/et al.] AND by Gadaffi/Koussa. I believe he is now operating as a double-agent.

Seems you are not alone in thinking that MK is a double agent:
(From http://www.express.co.uk/printer/view/238354/)

LIBYA DEFECTOR MOUSSA KOUSSA WAS AN MI6 DOUBLE AGENT

Sunday April 3,2011
Gordon Thomas and Marco Giannangeli

MOUSSA KOUSSA, the former Libyan head of Intelligence who defected to the UK last week, has been acting as a double agent for MI6 and the CIA for a decade, sources said last night.

It emerged that he met former MI6 head Sir John Scarlett in 2001 in London and agreed that a British agent could operate in Tripoli and pledged to help track down Al Qaeda activity in the region.
Koussa, who has been implicated in the Lockerbie bombing and the supplying of arms to the IRA, arrived in England last Wednesday. He is being questioned by the security services, MI5 and Ministry of Defence interrogation teams at a safe house near Guildford, Surrey.
A source said: "It has been an extremely benign form of interrogation so far. His chief concern has been the safety of his family. He was allowed to phone them but lines were down."
Last night it was not clear if he knew his wife had been seized by Gaddafi's forces in Tripoli.

So IF MK was behind Lockerbie (and not the Iranians), was he acting on orders by MI6 or CIA?

[Peter Lemkin]

Considering that he was conspicuously NOT mentioned as one to have their financial assets frozen, nor named as likely to be prosecuted by the ICC, it is my believe [at this time] that this 'defection' was planned a month ago, or more. And planned by both the Western Alliance [US/UK/NATO/UN/et al.] AND by Gadaffi/Koussa. I believe he is now operating as a double-agent.

Seems you are not alone in thinking that MK is a double agent:
(From http://www.express.co.uk/printer/view/238354/)

LIBYA DEFECTOR MOUSSA KOUSSA WAS AN MI6 DOUBLE AGENT

Sunday April 3,2011
Gordon Thomas and Marco Giannangeli

MOUSSA KOUSSA, the former Libyan head of Intelligence who defected to the UK last week, has been acting as a double agent for MI6 and the CIA for a decade, sources said last night.

It emerged that he met former MI6 head Sir John Scarlett in 2001 in London and agreed that a British agent could operate in Tripoli and pledged to help track down Al Qaeda activity in the region.
Koussa, who has been implicated in the Lockerbie bombing and the supplying of arms to the IRA, arrived in England last Wednesday. He is being questioned by the security services, MI5 and Ministry of Defence interrogation teams at a safe house near Guildford, Surrey.
A source said: "It has been an extremely benign form of interrogation so far. His chief concern has been the safety of his family. He was allowed to phone them but lines were down."
Last night it was not clear if he knew his wife had been seized by Gaddafi's forces in Tripoli.

So IF MK was behind Lockerbie (and not the Iranians), was he acting on orders by MI6 or CIA?

There are SO many hints and more than hints he was a CIA 'contact'; and MI6 is a sister agency [joined at the hip]......what happens to his wife would go a long way to telling if Gadaffi was in on this deception. Despite the UK saying he won't be given immunity, I'm sure in fact he will. He knows about too many 'beans' to be spilled, and can't be allowed to spill them! :darthvader: