"Libya.

A war of attrition settles for NATO

The time turns for Gaddafi in the deadly trial of strength that brings him into conflict with Obama and NATO. The NATO terrorist raids on Tripoli, but also al Jufra or Sebah - to nearly 1,000 km from the fighting where NO event ever took place - mark the headlong rush of French and British leaders, supported by Obama, real mastermind behind the assault against Libya. "Air strikes fail to stop the confrontation between the Libyan parties and are increasing the suffering of the Libyan civilians," said the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The sending of helicopters too. Which responds to the pro-Gaddafi uprisings which oppose for nearly a month now in Benghazi, Derna and Tobruk, Libyan patriots to Islamic-monarchist allies of NATO, al-Qaeda and Tehran?

Obama running out of time on Libya aggression

Obama has five days to get Congressional authorization for the intervention in Libya and must answer for armed actions in Libya before Sunday. The United States House of Representatives on Tuesday demanded an explanation from the president, Barack Obama, on the operations that the country is taking in Libya and warned that failure to get congressional authorization for these actions before Sunday could be violating the War Powers Act. The Speaker of the House of Representatives, John Boehner, explained in a letter sent to the White House that the Government must obtain authorization or cancel the operation in the African country, otherwise it is in violation of the regulations. ''It seems that within five days the administration will be in violation of the War Powers Resolution if it doesn't ask for and receive authorization from Congress or withdraws all troops and U.S. resources from the mission," expressed Boehner. The highest authority of the House asked Obama if he had made a "legal analysis" of the situation to justify the actions in Libya due to the "gravity of the constitutional and statutory questions" involved the situation. The War Powers Act aims to establish the powers of the president and Congress in military interventions. This legislation was passed in 1973

during the tenure of President Richard Nixon (1969-1974) over the veto of the head of state.

Geography of Libya

Map of Libya with major cities and settlements

Satellite image of Libya

Aria And Boundaries

Dust storm over the Tripolitania region of Libya. Over 90% of the country is desert. Area: total: 1 759 540 km land: 1 759 540 km water: 0 km Area - comparative: Libya is the fourth largest country in Africa, seven times the size of the United Kingdom, and slightly larger than Alaska Land boundaries:

total: 4 383 km border countries: Algeria 982 km, Chad 1 055 km, Egypt 1 150 km, Niger 354 km, Sudan 383 k
m,Tunisia 459 km Coastline: 1 770 km Maritime claims: territorial sea: 12 nmi (22.2 km; 13.8 mi) note: Gulf of Sidra closing line 32 degrees 30 minutes north

Culture
Main article: Culture of Libya Further information: Music of Libya and Libyan literature

Temple of Zeus in Cyrene. Libya has a number of World Heritage Sites from the ancient Greek and Roman eras, which are popular tourist destinations.

Coastline of Benghazi, Libya's second-largest city. With the longest Mediterraneancoastline among African nations, Libya's mostly unspoilt beaches are a social gathering place. Libya is culturally similar to its neighboring Maghrebian states. Libyans consider themselves very much a part of a wider Arab community. The Libyan state tends to strengthen this feeling by considering Arabic as the only official language, and forbidding the teaching and even the use of the Berber language. Libyan Arabs have a heritage in the traditions of the nomadic Bedouin and associate themselves with a particular Bedouin tribe.[citation needed] Libya boasts few theaters or art galleries.[200][201] For many years there have been no public theaters, and only a few cinemas showing foreign films. The tradition of folk culture is still alive and well, with troupes performing music and dance at frequent festivals, both in Libya and abroad.[citation needed] The main output of Libyan television is devoted to showing various styles of traditional Libyan music. Tuareg music and dance are popular in Ghadames and the south. Libyan

television programs are mostly in Arabic with a 30-minute news broadcast each evening in English and French. The government maintains strict control over all media outlets. A new analysis by theCommittee to Protect Journalists has found Libyas media the most tightly controlled in the Arab world.[202] To combat this, the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya government planned to introduce private media, an initiative intended to update the country's media.[203] Many Libyans frequent the country's beach and they also visit Libya's archaeological sitesespecially Leptis Magna, which is widely considered to be one of the best preserved Roman archaeological sites in the world.[204] The nation's capital, Tripoli, boasts many museums and archives; these include the Government Library, the Ethnographic Museum, the Archaeological Museum, the National Archives, the Epigraphy Museum and the Islamic Museum. The Jamahiriya Museum, built in consultation withUNESCO, may be the country's most famous.

Religion
Main article: Religion in Libya
Religion in Libya
religion percent

Islam Christianity Other

96.7% 2.0% 1.3%

Mosque in Ghadames, close to the Tunisian and Algerian border. About 97% of Libyans are followers of Islam.

By far the predominant religion in Libya is Islam with 97% of the population associating with the faith.[191] The vast majority of Libyan Muslims adhere to Sunni Islam, which provides both a spiritual guide for individuals and a keystone for government policy, but a minority (between 5 and 10%) adhere to Bedims (a branch of Kharijism), above all in

the Jebel Nafusa and the town of Zuwara, west of Tripoli. A Libyan form of Sufism is also common in parts of the country.[192] Before the 1930s, the Senussi Movement was the primary Islamic movement in Libya. This was a religious revival adapted to desert life. Its zawaaya (lodges) were found in Tripolitania and Fezzan,but Senussi influence was strongest in Cyrenaica. Rescuing the region from unrest and anarchy, the Senussi movement gave the Cyrenaican tribal people a religious attachment and feelings of unity and purpose. This Islamic movement, which was eventually destroyed by both Italian invasion and later the Gaddafi government was very conservative and somewhat different from the Islam that exists in Libya today. Gaddafi asserts that he is a devout Muslim, and his government is taking a role in supporting Islamic institutions and in worldwide proselytizing on behalf of Islam. A Libyan form of Sufism is also common in parts of the country Libya was until recent times the home of one of the oldest Jewish communities in the world, dating back to at least 300 BC. In 1942 the Italian Fascist authorities set up forced labor camps south of Tripoli for the Jews, including Giado (about 3,000 Jews) and Gharyan, Jeren, and Tigrinna. In Giado some 500 Jews died of weakness, hunger, and disease. In 1942, Jews who were not in the concentration camps were heavily restricted in their economic activity and all men between 18 and 45 years were drafted for forced labor. In August 1942, Jews from Tripolitania were interned in a concentration camp at Sidi Azaz. In the three years after November 1945, more than 140 Jews were murdered, and hundreds more wounded, in a series of pogroms. By 1948, about 38,000 Jews remained in the country. Upon Libya's independence in 1951, most of the Jewish community emigrated.

Population:
At the 1984 census, Libya had a population of 3,637,488. The 1997 estimated population was 5,484,202, giving the country an overall population density of 3 persons per sq km (8 per sq mi). The population, however, is unevenly distributed; more than two-thirds live in the more densely settled coastal areas. The indigenous population of Libya is mostly Berber and Arab in origin; about 17 percent of the population consists of foreign workers and their families. Some 86 percent of the people live in urban areas, although some Libyans still live in nomadic or semi nomadic groups.

Background or Causes of Aggression

Resolution 1973 was supposedly about protecting Libyan civilians from what the West said was a "pending genocide," undoubtedly pending in the minds of Sarkozy, Cameron and Obama, but never as apparent in Libya itself.

Surprisingly, the propaganda line that Gaddafi was about to carry out a gruesome genocide in Benghazi was bought by the likes of Noam Chomsky even, a veteran who should know better about what comes from the lips of US presidents, especially when they are pronouncing a war. Before long, Operation Odyssey was unsurprisingly taken over by NATO, and what many regarded as crude aggression by two rogue states was elevated to an outright terror campaign. With the help of NATO aerial firepower, the small group of Benghazi rebels began to gather courage and began capturing Libyan cities, coercing many civilians to join their cause or be shot dead; in fact killing as many as 50 000 they accused of either supporting Muammar Gaddafi or being his spies or mercenaries, especially the dark skinned citizens of Libya. The statistics are estimates from various independent sources. After the rebels entered and rampaged Tripoli, of course following in the footsteps of a devastating NATO team of murderous warplanes, the massive crowds that had earlier been seen turning out in their hundreds of thousands in support of Gaddafi, defiantly waving Libya's green flag; were all but intimidated into silence by NATO's indiscriminate terror bombings, strategically followed by a newly-assembled group of heavily armed rebels brandishing brand new high-tech military hardware fresh from American military warehouses. The rag tag rebels even masqueraded as trained soldiers in their brand new military fatigues. Talk of rebels who know no war. It no longer mattered that the majority of the rebels were untrained activists who hardly knew how to handle a gun. The fact that these untrained and over-excited goons were coming under the cover of marauding NATO warplanes was good enough a threat to make the Gaddafi forces and their legion of supporters flee Tripoli's defence posts. Even Gaddafi's residence was left unguarded; and NATO grazed the compound to smithereens ahead of the rebels. It would have been foolhardy to stand against the high-tech bombs. The rebels have had the temerity to brazenly demand the loyalty of people who clearly do not support their cause in Sirte, and we have Africans cheering as these innocent civilians are told to comply with NATO demands or be bombed to ashes. Other cities threatened with terror attacks include Zawiya and Bani Walid. This is so much for respecting the will of the Libyan people, as the rhetoric has been sounding from the cave mouth of Sarkozy. From the start of this Western coordinated armed insurgence the rebels have been intimidating Libyans into supporting their cause, forcing people to surrender to their will, all the way until they managed to intimidate the people of Tripoli into submission,

proceeding to do the same in all other cities where civilians had publicly vowed to fight the Western backed aggression. Now NATO and the rebels are at the doorstep of Sirte, ready to commit a genocide bigger than what they said Gaddafi was about to carry out on Benghazi, the very pretext that allowed Western elite murderers to invite themselves into Libya. If it was Gaddafi at the doorstep of Benghazi, telling the people in the city to allow him to come in and arrest the leaders of the insurgence, there is no doubt the US, France and the UK would be bluntly opposed to such an eventuality arguing that "the will of the people of Libya must be respected." Of course the will of the people of Sirte deserves no respect for its foolishness of opposing the Western position. But why is it that the will of the people of Sirte is not important to the murderous Westerners? Why is it that the people of Bani Walid and other cities to the South of Libya have no right to have their will respected? NATO bombs Tripolians to impose the will of Benghazi rebels and we are told that is victory for democracy. And the African Union watches like a kid robbed of his favourite toy by a tormenting bully. NATO is ready to continue with its war crimes and terror attacks on the people of Libya and our eyes are supposed to be glued to the fiction of a monstrous Gaddafi whose grip on Libyans we are told had become so much of an unbearable hell, a hell that provided free health care, free education, free housing and interest free loans for the Libyan folk. We hear the people of Libya want a new dispensation without Gaddafi and one would hope that the rebels would meet celebrating masses at the gates of Sirte, Tripoli and the other cities to the West and South of Libya. What we saw were marauding gun trotting goons and an entirely intimidated population. All we have seen are brutalising NATO terror planes and a legion of Western armed thugs waiting to destroy the civilians of the cities of the so-called "Gaddafi loyalists," should they fail to denounce Gaddafi and support the Benghazi cause.

Result of the Aggression

Western Aggression on Libya - by Stephen Lendman Make no mistake. Another Washington-led resource war targets Libya's riches, besides wanting new US base locations for greater regional dominance. America doesn't covet regional sun, sand and sea. "Humanitarian intervention" is a lie. So are notions about peace, not war, liberation, equity, justice, and other democratic values. Washington tolerates none of them abroad or at home, plundering the world roguishly.

All US presidents are war criminals. Obama is one of the worst, doubling Bush's lawlessness, adding Pakistan and Libya aggression to Iraq and Afghanistan, spending $1.5 trillion annually for militarism plus multi-trillion dollar handouts to Wall Street crooks, while pleading poverty to cut essential homeland social benefits. As a result, it's no exaggeration saying America is on a fast-track to tyranny and ruin. It's no longer a fit place to live in. Young people have a choice - leave or be exploited, a shocking indictment of a corrupted, declining, lawless nation. On March 22, the Israeli news site Debka.com said reports about "jubilant Libyan rebels encouraged by (cruise missile attacks) to resume their offensive against Qaddafi's forces Monday were misleading at best." Rebels, in fact, have only one organized platoon, no match against government forces without supportive air strikes, as well as "American, British, French," and perhaps Egyptian and other Arab ground troops joining them. "The rebels must therefore be satisfied with holding Benghazi downtown and a few sectors for as long as they can." The result of inaction towards our call may not only facilitate the destruction of Africa but also contribute to surrendering African sovereignty to the designs and tastes of alqaeda terrorist and their NATO mentors. Such inaction on the part of the government of President Koroma in Freetown will also ensure that Libya and the Libyan people remain at
the mercy of al-qaeda terrorism. Libya must live!

Opinion of the Libyan People

From the start of this Western coordinated armed insurgence the rebels have been intimidating Libyans into supporting their cause, forcing people to surrender to their will, all the way until they managed to intimidate the people of Tripoli into submission, proceeding to do the same in all other cities where civilians had publicly vowed to fight the Western backed aggression. Of course the will of the people of Sirte deserves no respect for its foolishness of opposing the Western position. But why is it that the will of the people of Sirte is not important to the murderous Westerners? Why is it that the people of Bani Wald and other cities to the South of Libya have no right to have their will respected? NATO bombs Tripolians to impose the will of Benghazi rebels and we are told that is victory for democracy. And the African Union watches like a kid robbed of his favorite toy by a tormenting bully. The people of Libya want a new dispensation without Gaddafi and one would hope that the rebels would meet celebrating masses at the gates of Sirte, Tripoli and the other cities to the West and South of Libya. What we saw were marauding gun trotting goons and an entirely intimidated population.

Impact
On March 25, 2010, the African Court on Human and Peoples Rights ordered the Great Socialist Peoples Libyan Arab Jamahiriya (Libya) to comply with provisional measures in response to reports of serious and widespread abuses of human rights enshrined in the African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights (Banjul Charter). The allegations relate to maneuvers by Muammar Gaddafis regime to violently suppress anti-government demonstrations by Libyan citizens. These demonstrations soon escalated into violent confrontation, and Libya is now enmeshed in an ongoing armed conflict between forces loyal to Gaddafi and the opposing rebel movement. In the provisional measures similar to an interim injunction the Court ordered the Gaddafi regime to immediately refrain from conduct in further breach of the Banjul Charter or any international human rights instruments to which Libya is also party. The Court additionally ordered that Libya report to the Court within fifteen days on the measures taken to implement the order. It is now a near certainty that Libya has received and opted to defy the Courts order. The regime continues to ignore its obligations under the Banjul Charter in its efforts to suppress the conflict and regain its iron grip on power. Nonetheless, the order represents a historic step for the African Court, signaling that the African human rights system has embraced a proactive role in ending this conflict and holding the Gaddafi regime accountable for human rights violations committed against its own people. The order responded to an application brought by the African Commission on Human and Peoples Rights, alleging serious and massive violations of human rights guaranteed under the [Banjul Charter]. Specifically, the application itself based on successive complaints the Commission received about events in Libya alleged breaches of Articles 1, 2, 4, 5, 9, 11, 12, 13, and 23 of the Charter, among them the rights to life and integrity, freedom of expression, assembly, participation in government, and national peace and security. The African Court is governed by its constitutive document, the Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights on the Establishment of an African Court on Human and Peoples Rights (Protocol), as well as its interim Rules of Court. Both Article 27(2) of the Protocol and Rule 51(1) of the Rules provide that in cases of extreme gravity and urgency involving imminent risk to human life, the Court may issue provisional measures propio motu (of its own accord) without first giving the State Party an opportunity to provide written pleadings or attend oral hearings. Here, the Court first made a prima facie determination of its jurisdiction, as required under Article 3(1) of the Protocol, based on Libyas ratification of both the Charter and the Protocol and the Commissions standing under Article 5(1)(a) of the Protocol to submit cases to the Court. Then, as permitted under Rule 51(2) for such urgent applications, the Court used what reliable means were available for its factual basis in this instance, NGO communications contained in the application and the denunciations of other regional and universal human rights bodies. Despite the fact that Libya is unlikely to comply with the provisional measures, the Courts order bodes well for the future, particularly as it demonstrates a collaborative relationship between the Commission and the Court. Since the Courts formation, there has been some

uncertainty regarding how the complementary relationship between the two organs, outlined in Article 2 of the Protocol, would function. In the Libyan circumstances, the Commission received complaints of a State Partys serious and widespread breaches and filed a timely application amid the first signs of civil unrest; the Court in turn responded decisively and was early to recognize the potential escalation toward conflict in Libya. International responses have praised the Courts order. The British Foreign and Commonwealth Office, for one, hailed it as a strong and welcome statement from the African human rights system, which signals that the continent is invested in bringing stability and justice to citizens of a State Party. Such praise is, however, set against condemnation of the African Union (AU), despite its efforts to broker a peace deal in Libya, for failing to insist on compliance with the Courts binding order. Human Rights Watch urged the AU to apply pressure in accordance with Article 29(2) of the Protocol, which makes the AUs Executive Council primarily responsible for monitoring implementation of the Courts rulings. Although the Protocol does not specify what measures may be taken, Article 23(2) of the AUs Constitutive Act authorizes it to subject noncompliant States Parties to sanctions or other measures of a political or economic nature. Since this is the Courts first decision issued against a State Party, it is an early indication of the Courts potential. Yet, to fully realize the Courts potential, the AU must strike a proper balance between its dual roles as mediator and enforcer,lest it risk undermining the African Courts still fledgling credibility as a mechanism for the promotion and protection of human rights in Africa.

Conclusion
Resolution 1973 was supposedly about protecting Libyan civilians from what the West said was a "pending genocide," undoubtedly pending in the minds of Sarkozy, Cameron and Obama, but never as apparent in Libya itself. The NATO terrorist raids on Tripoli, but also al Jufra or Sebah - to nearly 1,000 km from the fighting where NO event ever took place - mark the headlong rush of French and British leaders, supported by Obama, real mastermind behind the assault against Libya. "Air strikes fail to stop the confrontation between the Libyan parties and are increasing the suffering of the Libyan civilians,"