NATO attack on Libyan Anti-Corruption Office an attempt to destroy incriminating evidence on Sarkozy

[Ed Jewett]

There is an "embargoed" report by Wayne Madsen at his site "for subscribers only" which draws attention to the NATO attack on Libya and the offices of its Anti-Corruption Agency and asks whether it wasn't perhaps an attempt to destroy evidence against those who might face criminal inquiry with regard to the Libyan Sovereign Wealth Fund.

I bring this to the 9/11 thread because there are clear parallels between 9/11 and this event, if Madsen is correct. There are other threads here on that topic already underway.

I will post the report by Madsen in good time, after the usual and customary time period has elapsed according to his own rules. It is possible it will show up elsewhere on the Internet in the interim.

[Jan Klimkowski]

There is an "embargoed" report by Wayne Madsen at his site "for subscribers only" which draws attention to the NATO attack on Libya and the offices of its Anti-Corruption Agency and asks whether it wasn't perhaps an attempt to destroy evidence against those who might face criminal inquiry with regard to the Libyan Sovereign Wealth Fund.

I bring this to the 9/11 thread because there are clear parallels between 9/11 and this event, if Madsen is correct. There are other threads here on that topic already underway.

I will post the report by Madsen in good time, after the usual and customary time period has elapsed according to his own rules. It is possible it will show up elsewhere on the Internet in the interim.

Ed - thank you for this.

I respectfully disagree about any 9/11 analogies - even allowing for the nature of the records that may have been destroyed during the WTC attacks.

I disagree because I would judge 9/11 as first and foremost a trigger event (whether LIHOP or MIHOP) to justify the creation of the War on Terror and the passing of various, already written, draconian Volkland Security bills. In my judgement, the destruction of dangerous records such as those in Cantor Fitzgerald would have represented a secondary, opportunistic, rationale.

Whereas if Madsen's sources are correct, the attack on the Libyan Anti-Corruption Office would have been purely an attempt to destroy damaging evidence of long-term western complicity with Gaddafi's regime prior to NATO/coalition of the willing takeover of Libya.

I am reminded of this account from US Army Counterintelligence Special Agent, David DeBatto, describing his search for WMD as part of Operation Iraqi Freedom:

Looking around the rest of the bunker interior, I could see dozens of metal chemicals containers - some apparently unopened, and some with their tops open and with dried, powdery substances on the floor all around them and inside the containers. Some containers were covered with what appeared to be dried liquids, almost like dry paint, streaming down the sides.

I can honestly say that I was having a hard time comprehending what I was seeing. Unless my senses were deceiving me, Weichert and I had actually found the mother load of Operation Iraqi Freedom - actual Iraqi WMD. I walked over to one of the crates and saw a plastic sheath containing what appeared to be a bill of laden. I cut it open with my Leatherman and pulled the documents out.

At this point I want to say that loud and clear that I very much regret not having either shoved that document in my pocket or made a copy of it and sent it home for safe keeping. At the time I actually thought that a report would be written and normal Army and intelligence protocol would be followed, so there would be no need for me to have to prove anything. But I digress�

I opened the folded off-white paper form and noticed several interesting things right away. The bombs had been purchased in the United States in 1988 from what appeared to be a government contractor called The Carlyle Group. I am almost embarrassed now to say that I had not heard of The Carlyle Group at that time so the name meant nothing to me. The only reason I remember it at all is that I was amazed that the bill was in English and I was stunned to see that a bomb that was used by Iraq in delivering chemical WMD - the only WMD found during the entire Iraq war - was in fact supplied to Saddam Hussein by the United States. Un-blanking believable.

The date on the bill was either 1987 or 1988, I don�t recall exactly. I do recall that the bomb was manufactured in Spain and shipped through France. So much for their claims of being holier-than-thou. I checked several more bills and they were all identical. These bombs had all been shipped together. Rahman told us that similar weapons had been used all throughout the Iran-Iraq war during the 1980s as well as against the Kurds. We were staring at what could have possibly been some of the same type of WMD used in one of the most heinous attacks in recorded history � the gassing of Halabja in March of 1988 which killed an estimated 5,000 Kurdish civilians.

I instructed Weichert to both videotape and take digital still photos of the bunker and its contents. The outside area which included many more chemical containers and HAZMAT suits were documented as well. At least fifteen minutes of video and 50 still photos were taken at that location. These were then incorporated and attached to the detailed written report that I wrote and sent up the chain of command through CI channels.

I also personally reported the discovery to the battalion commander of the 223rd MI, CA ARNG, Lt. Col. Timothy Ryan. Ryan seem excited by the news and asked to be taken to the bunker immediately. Weichert and I drove Ryan to the bunker within minutes after his request and showed him our discovery. He seemed genuinely impressed with the authenticity of our find. He commented to me, "You guys have found the real deal."

So we had. Too bad it was ours.

[Ed Jewett]

"Wayne Madsen (Washington)
No problem re-publishing Libya datelines."
http://www.waynemadsenreport.com/articles/20110605_2



"The NATO attack on Libya's Anti-Corruption Agency on May 17 was extremely convenient for some Westrern politicians who could gave faced criminal probes had the Libyan agency completed its investigation of fraud and corruption by Libyan officials, including several ministers and other Libyan government officials who defected to the rebel side.

The Anti-Corrption Agency's files, fortunately, were backed up and are now stored in a secure location, according to Libyan officials this reporter spoke to during a recent trip to the Libyan capital.

The Anti-Corruption Agency was, among other things, investigating how Goldman Sachs "mis-invested" $1.3 billion from the Libyan Sovereign Wealth Fund. The loss of the Libyan money was reported officially in 2008 but the investments by Goldman Sachs took place over the previous few years/ There are strong indications that some of the Libyan money was siphoned off from Goldman Sachs into the presidential campaign coffers of then-French Interior Minister Nicolas Sarkozy, who was elected president of France in 2007. Cash payments into Sarkozy's campaign coffers was alluded to by Muammar Qaddafi's son, Seif al Islam Qaddafi, in an interview with the press. Both Colonel Qaddafi and Seif are now subject to International Criminal Court arrest warrants.

WMR learned that the Libyan Anti-Corruption Agency was prioritized as a NATO target by France. Sarkozy and his friend, the French Zionist champion Bernard-Henri Levy, were early supporters of the Libyan rebel movement and France was the first nation to recgonize the rebels as the government of Libya. It comes as no surprise, therefore, that the rebel Interim Transitional National Council is made up of a number of ex-Libyan government officials who were subject to investigations for fraud by the Anti-Corruption Agency but were also suspected of close links with the CIA. Chief among the suspects is Mahmoud Jibril, the former Libyan Planning Minister and chief of the Economic Development Board. Jibril, who received his doctorate from the University of Pittsburgh, was under investigation by Libyan intelligence for being an agent of the CIA. Jibril now serves as the prime minister of the rebel0declared "Libyan Republic."

Jibril successfully pressed Senator John Kerry, the chairman of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, to unfreeze $30 billion in frozen Libyan assets held by the US Treasury Department and transfer the funds to the Libyan rebels. However, WMR learned in Tripoli that based on the rebels squandering $US500.5 million and Libyan Dinar 900 million in cash looted from the Libyan Central Bank in Benghazi, the U.S. Treasury Department is reluctant to allow unfrozen Libyan assets to end up in the hands of the rebel leaders, who are considered by some U.S. Treasury officials to be blatant crooks.

Proof of the receipt of Libyan Sovereign Wealth Fund cash by Sarkozy will re-open the Clearstream scandal, in which Sarkozy was accused of receiving cash payments through a Clearstream account in Luxembourg. The money stemmed from business bribes between France and companies and government officials in Taiwan and Pakistan. Sarkozy denied the charges and tried to turn the tables by accusing his chief rival, former French Prime Minister Dominique deVillepin, of manufacturing the Clearstream evidence. Sarkozy, therefore, has every reason to press NATO to attack the Libyan Anti-Corruption Agency in order to destroy any incriminating evidence that could be used in criminal charges against Sarkozy and his campaign. Sarkozy is running for re-election as French president in 2012 and a Libyan political payola scandal would have all but sunk Sarkozy's chances for re-election and may have even landed him in prison."

http://www.waynemadsenreport.com/articles/20110608_3


"The New York Times' correspondent in Tripoli, John Burns, phoned the co-host of the program and suggested he broadcast from a bunker, an indication that Libyan state TV may be on the NATO target list while this program was being aired."

http://www.waynemadsenreport.com/

[Ed Jewett]

Jan, we'll agree to respectfully disagree on the 9/11 analogies. [But if the administrators want to move this thread out of the 9/11 section, I raise no objection.] More than a few have painted 9/11 as a crime of financial or economic ramifications [remember the announcement on 9/10/01 by Rumsfeld about the missing trillions?], especially given the key roles given to AIG, Marsh and McLennan, the presence of Jerry Bremer on the ground in Iraq in his post-9/11 role dishing out pallets stacked with freshly-printed dollars, and more. A look at who AIG is, and was, and who formed it, is intriguing.

Elsewhere, I have also posted some of the articles by Catherine Austin Fitts on black budgets, "negative ROI", "the tapeworm", the role of the state in narcotics money laundering, etc.

I think part of the very issue involved in dissecting the 9/11 events retroactively is a) not to see them as a single entity; b) to accept or theorize that the "reasons" may have had multiple bifurcations (as you say, opportunistic actions). There's more... but we will have to let it evolve in time.