Dr Moussa Ibrahim’s first public address since Nato’s War on Libya in 2011

On Mon 12 Jan 2015 in Committee Room 15 in the Houses of Parliament Dr Moussa Ibrahim addresses the event ‘Libya: Nato’s Untold Story’ organised by the Tricontinental Anti-Imperialist Platform. This is the first time Dr Ibrahim has addressed the public and media in english since his advocacy for justice for Libya as Libyan Jamahiryan government spokesperson through the Nato war of aggression against Libya in 2011.

Advertisements

LES BANQUES QUI NE PASSENT PAS LES STRESS-TESTS dont DEXIA – ECB Fails 25 Banks

du 27 au 31 octobre 2014 : C’est curieux, j’aimerais bien savoir comment les tests ont été menés. Quand la Banque Postale stresse ses clients pour 30 euros, elle devrait figurer en tête de liste des “fails”… [Note de CounterPsyOps: au total le sauvetage de DEXIA par la Banque Postale et la Caisse des Dépôts et Consignations aura coûté plus de 12 Milliards d’euros au contribuable Français , 6 Milliards d’euros à l’époque de Sarkozy à l’automne 2008, et 6.6 Milliards en janvier 2014 grâce à François Hollande]

L’article de Bloomberg est ici, avec les commentaires complets. De son côté Zero Hedge a écrit: “40% des banques de l’Eurozone sont en mauvaise santé… 130 banks sont testées, de 12 à 18 échoueront, et pour couronner le tout un tiers des 130, soit 40%, passeront le test sur le fil du rasoir… Cela veut dire que 40 à 44% des banques de l’Eurozone banks sont en mauvaise santé… If 40% of your banks are either dead in the water or barely floating, I’d say you have a major problem“… Surtout si vous examinez les garanties postées dans les bilans. Par exemple en Bulgarie, avec la banque qui a fait faillite, seuls 13% des prêts avaient une hypothèque valide. Les 83% autres étaient bidons, inexistants ou totalement suévalués. Et c’était la 4e plus grosse banque bulgare.

 

Source: Bloomberg

Revue de Presse par Pierre Jovanovic © www.jovanovic.com 2008-2014

 

STERIA ET GOLDMAN SACHS PARTIES PRENANTES DANS LES PORTIQUES D’ECOTAXE !

20131104-093656.jpg

bastamagazine, via Pierre Jovanovic

QUIMPER
Sarkozy ou Hollande, peu importe, sachez seulement que la décision a été prise au pire de la crise économique et quand tout le monde connaissait le rôle néfaste de la Goldman Sachs. Cela n’a pas empêché les enarques de confier à la banque américaine Goldman Sachs le soin de gérer les rentrées de ces portiques!!! “Derrière cette taxe écologique se cache une autre question qui n’a jamais été soumise au débat public: c’est la première fois que la collecte de l’impôt est confiée à des entreprises privées. Un consortium emmené par Benetton, Goldman Sachs, Thalès et SFR empochera 20% des recettes de la taxe pour assurer son recouvrement … Le produit de la perception de la taxe, estimée à 1200 millions d’euros par an, sera reversé à l’administration des douanes. Une première en matière de fiscalité! Un système choisi sous Sarkozy et mis en œuvre par un gouvernement socialiste et écologiste… L’écotaxe “s’appuie sur un mode de recouvrement entièrement nouveau et automatisé. A bien des égards, c’est une taxe du XXIe siècle !”, s’enthousiasme la sénatrice UMP Marie-Hélène Des Esgaulx, dans un rapport remis à la Commission des finances en février dernier”. Et comme le contrat va être rompu, les Français vont quand même payer 1 milliard à ces entreprises pour les dédommager!

Mais il ya mieux, lisez bien, c’est totalement fou, on retrouve la Steria, auteur du logiciel bâclé Louvois qui ne paye pas les militaires:” Qui va toucher ces 280 millions par an (desquels sont déduits 50 millions de TVA)?

Un consortium d’entreprises baptisé Ecomouv, mené par le groupe italien Autostrade per l’Italia. Celui-ci est une filiale d’Atlantia, la société qui gère la plupart des autoroutes italiennes. Elle est détenue (à 48 %) par le fonds d’investissement Sintonia, propriété de la famille Benetton. La banque Goldman Sachs est entrée au capital de ce fonds en 2008. Autostrade, qui détient 70 % d’Ecomouv, s’est allié avec les groupes français Thales, SNCF, SFR et Steria … Visiblement, personne ne s’est demandé comment la SNCF appréhendera d’éventuels conflits d’intérêt, alors que les 3300 camions de sa filiale Geodis, spécialisée dans le transport de marchandises, seront concernés par l’écotaxe … Ecomouv prévoit des recettes de près de 2,8 milliards d’euros pour les 11,5 années d’exploitation du dispositif”…

ALGÉRIE, TUNISIE, LIBYE, SYRIE : LE GOUVERNEMENT FRANÇAIS ET LES FRÈRES MUSULMANS “CRIMES SANS CHÂTIMENT”

Dans son ouvrage “Crimes sans châtiment”, Jean-Loup Izambert revient sur les collusions qui existent entre les Frères Musulmans et le Pouvoir Français depuis les années 1990, ainsi que sur l’implication des gouvernements Français dans les guerres de Libye et de Syrie.
Radio Courtoisie 2013.05.04 JL Izambert “Crimes sans chatiment”

20130509-231216.jpg

Libya: How Many Dirty Western Hands?

By Felicity Arbuthnot

Global Research, October 01, 2012

Oh what a tangled web they weave

When first they practice to invade

A sovereign nation and deceive

The world about their dark crusade.

 Michael Leunig, Poet, Cartoonist, 1945

This weekend a detailed article (i) suggested that a: “French secret serviceman, acting on the express orders of the then President Sarkozy, is suspected of  ”the murder of Colonel Quaddafi”, on 20th October last year.

Whilst bearing in mind that the NATO-backed insurgents now in power, who have near destroyed much of Libya, de-stabilised, terrorized and hope to carve up Libya’s resources for their, rather than the country’s benefit, have every reason to wish to disassociate themselves from the butchery of Colonel Quaddafi’s terrible death, the new allegations illuminate interesting points.

The French assassin, it is claimed, infiltrated the mob rabidly manhandling the Colonel, and shot him in the head.

“The motive, according to well placed (Libyan) sources”, was to prevent any chance of interrogation into Sarkozy’s links with Colonel Quaddafi. Continue reading

Will NATO Try a Wag-the-Dog Provocation Against Syria to Keep Sarkozy in Power After May 6?

Tarpley: I think there is a significant degree of centralization in the following sense. It’s the NATO states plus the reactionary feudal monarchies of the Gulf, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and others. The history of this, I think, is interesting you are dealing with death squads. They are indeed terrorists but the kernel, the hard core, the main force of what’s causing the trouble in Syria is these death squads and where did they come from.

Back in 2006, 2007 the US forces in Iraq found that their situation was almost untenable and Ambassador John Negroponte was brought in after a career in Central America and Latin America. It was found that wherever Negroponte showed up in Central America, in Salvador that death squads would appear and begin essentially Continue reading

Ex-directeur de la DST : Sarkozy est responsable du chaos en Libye et au Mali

L’ancien directeur de la Direction de la surveillance du territoire (DST), un service de renseignements du ministère de l’Intérieur, Yves Bonnet, a accusé  le président Nicolas Sarkozy d’être responsable «  du chaos en Libye, au Mali », soulignant que ” le manque de confiance entre l’Algérie et la France a aggravé la situation dans la région de la côte de l’Afrique “.

Dans  une interview accordée au quotidien  algérien alAkhbar, Bonnet a jugé que “l’Afrique fait l’objet de perturbations sécuritaires de plus en plus dangereuses en raison du chaos provoqué en Libye, et dont  les parties responsables sont bien connues à savoir  l’OTAN et la France. Or, ces derniers n’ont pas tenu compte de quelque chose de grave, celui de  réfléchir sur les résultats d’une intervention dans les affaires d’un Etat quel que soit la nature de son régime”.

Il a souligné qu’ “en politique, il est impératif de s’assurer que le règlement que nous cherchons dans une quelconque situation sera de loin meilleur que la situation elle-même, autrement dit  dans le cas de la Libye, je pense que la situation d’avant était bien meilleure que celle d’aujourd’hui.” Continue reading

False Flag – The Toulouse Murders

By Diana JOHNSTONE at CounterPunch

The current French presidential election campaign was rudely interrupted at its very start by a series of murders in and around the southwestern city of Toulouse. On March 11, a paratrooper was shot dead by a mysterious motorcyclist in Toulouse. Four days later, in the nearby garrison town of Montauban, two more paratroopers were shot dead in similar circumstances. Then, four days after that, early in the morning of March 21 in a residential neighborhood of Toulouse, a helmeted gunman approached a Jewish school and coolly shot dead a rabbi and three children at point blank range before driving off on his motorcycle.

Since the targeted paratroopers were reported to be of North African extraction, the first wave of reaction focused on the assumption that the gunman was a far right racist, comparable to the Norwegian mass murderer Ander Behring Breivik. Commentators and politicians rushed to blame rightwing campaign rhetoric for “stirring up hatred”. Bernard Henry Lévy recycled his perpetual accusation that France is inherently anti-Semitic, writing: “So there you have it, France is a country where in 2012, in the third largest city, one can shoot at a Jewish school and kill several innocent children at point blank range.” The insinuation that France as a whole was somehow guilty was echoed on the front page of the International Herald Tribune, which predicted that the political debate around the shooting was likely to continue as “soul-searching about the nature of France”.

The reactions necessarily shifted drastically after it was reported that the lone killer had been identified as a 23-year-old Frenchman of Algerian extraction, Mohamed Merah. Rather than a neo-Nazi racist, the killer presented himself as an Al Qaeda fighter. As police surrounded his apartment in Toulouse, he reportedly claimed by telephone that he had killed the paratroopers for having fought in Afghanistan and murdered Jewish children to “avenge Palestinian children”.

At this news, the establishment reaction changed register. While still condemning anti-Semitism, politicians and commentators now hastened to stress that Mohamed Merah was certainly not at all representative of the peaceful, law-abiding Muslim community of France. This was obvious enough. But the majority of the political-media establishment apparently thought it needed to be repeated ad infinitum. This point was stressed even by National Front candidate Marine Le Pen, implicitly the main target of accusations that campaign rhetoric had inspired racist killing. She now could say that she had been right to warn that authorities were not paying not enough attention to the radical Salafist minority of Islamist extremists.

Meanwhile, in sharp contrast to the quasi-unanimity of the media-political establishment, there was a veritable explosion of disbelief and suspicion on the internet. Who was Merah? Some doubted that he was the killer. Was this a “false flag” ? Or “black propaganda”? Or some such contrived operation designed to influence the election, arouse anti-Muslim sentiment, and justify an attack on civil liberties at home? And who profits from the crime? To some, the immediate answer seemed obvious: Sarkozy. It was even suggested that the President himself must be behind this, in order to win an otherwise lost re-election.

The mainstream press completely ignored the undercurrent of suspicion, which is becoming more and more common ever since the September 11, 2001, attacks on the World Trade center. It is symptomatic of a deepening alienation from and distrust of the entire political establishment in the Western world. There is so much fakery in the official discourse that a growing number of people refuse to believe anything that comes from authoritative sources.

In any case, the official story contained elements that were bound to arouse suspicion.

Merah was well known to police and should have been a prime suspect from the start. He had made an appointment with his first victim using a traceable family computer. If police had acted more swiftly, it seems he could have been apprehended before committing his subsequent crimes.

Merah’s detailed claims to have committed the crimes, and his explanations of his motives, were made by telephone first to the France 24 TV channel and then to police negotiators trying to get him to surrender. But the public has not been allowed to hear these conversations.

Despite Sarkozy’s order to capture Merah alive, after over 30 hours of siege the final assault ended in a hail of gunfire, with Merah dead from a bullet through his head. There can be no trial, no questioning.

Strangest of all was Merah’s highly unusual travel itinerary, reportedly taking him to Lebanon, Turkey, Syria, Tajikistan, Afghanistan, Pakistan and even Israel, a detail which feeds speculation that he may have been a Mossad agent as well as a Taliban trainee. Such globe trotting requires large amounts of money and know-how. Merah had no steady job and no regular income.

Merah had a contact with an agent of the French internal intelligence agency DCRI, which suggests to some observers that he had been recruited as a police informer after his multiple arrests for petty thievery.

These and a few other factors have fueled suspicion that Merah was framed, or manipulated, or deliberately allowed to commit his crimes in order to influence public opinion for Sarkozy, or for Israel, or for war against Islam.

As president, Sarkozy had the privilege for two or three days of displaying his indignation, stressing his resolve to “defend the Republic”, in short of “embodying the nation”, while the election campaign was suspended and his rivals reduced to standing mute at funeral ceremonies where Sarkozy reigned. While commentators praised his reaction as flawlessly statesmanlike, in the eyes of many he overdid his dramatization of the tragic circumstances to upstage his rivals. The political opportunist characteristically takes advantage of events more than he creates them. In any case, polls have shown no impact on voters’ intentions from the Toulouse killings. The Toulouse drama is unlikely to affect the outcome of the presidential election, which takes place in two rounds on April 22 and May 6. Voters are more concerned with economic issues. Sarkozy still trails his main Socialist rival by the same wide margin for the decisive second round of voting on May 6.

Five years ago, Sarkozy campaigned as a “law and order” candidate, and cannot plausibly do so again. Despite the rhetorical promises to fight crime, his government has been cutting back personnel in the police just as in the schools and in hospitals, to “save money” by reducing the public sector, impoverished by his tax breaks to his rich friends.

The official version of such events usually contains two elements that tend to arouse suspicion. One is the need to cover up official incompetence. The other is the desire to reassure the public. Both usually involve talking down to the public and ignoring troublesome facts.

Had security services tried to use Merah as an informer, and lost control of him along the way? However one looks at it, the element of police incompetence in this case seems undeniable. The failure to capture him alive seems inexplicable.

Is it credible that a young man could decide by himself to carry out such killings? The reasons reportedly given by Merah for his acts are more understandable than the acts themselves, and the acts did clearly take place. We are constantly told that we are at war, against “terrorism”. We are all expected to be on the same side, but at the same time the war involves “identity” labeling. A “holy warrior”, whether a U.S. Marine in Afghanistan or a self-styled Mujahid in Toulouse, may be so blinded by the story he has learned or told himself about this war as to fail to see his own actions in a normal human light. These motives may be similar in both cases: a desire for revenge against a group seen as the enemy of the group with which the perpetrator identifies.

Continue reading