(THIS ARTICLE IS MACHINE TRANSLATED by Google from Norwegian)
Norway has a direct responsibility for the refugee disaster in the Mediterranean. NATO's bombing war in 2011 was led by the United States, Britain and France, but Denmark and Norway initially accounted for a third of the bombing. The bombing war destroyed Libya as a state power. Today, the country is made up of local armies, mafia-like structures and Islamist forces, all of whom are trying to support themselves through a massive trafficking of human beings, where large numbers of refugees are sent on descending ships. This business had been operating for over ten years, but it was stopped by Libya's then-leader Muammar Gaddafi. This was a decisive cause of the war. Through an agreement with Italy in 2008, which in effect took effect in 2009, Gaddafi had agreed to stop human trafficking from cities such as Benghazi and Misrata, which earned smugglers revenue of tens – if not hundreds – of millions. Gaddafi took from them this wealth, and the mobilization against him came shortly after.
Everything was a bluff.
During the period 2000–2009, black Africans applied to the Libyan oil industry to raise money for their journey to Europe. Some sources believe that as many as 20-30 Blacks annually paid perhaps NOK 10 each to human traffickers to be taken on boats to Italy. The Mafia of Benghazi and Misrata earned huge sums. At the same time, old racism existed from the time when Arab Libyans held blacks as slaves. In Libya, there was a significant black population from the slave era, and the black guest workers were often treated equally badly. The Economist wrote in 000 about pogroms against black guest workers who had led to hundreds of deaths. In 2000, the UN asked Libya to put an end to this racial discrimination. Muammar Gaddafi apologized to the black people for the treatment they had received in Libya, and many in northern Libya perceived Gaddafi as an ally with the black Africans.
"A new Rwanda". In February – March 2011, Western media wrote about a massacre, or an impending massacre, of civilians. On March 1, there was talk of "6000 dead." Muammar Gaddafi's forces were described as a direct threat to freedom fighters in Benghazi and Misrata. Senator John McCain said Gaddafi would go from house to house killing all 700 people in Banghazi if his forces were not stopped. US politicians and Libyan opposition talked about a new Rwanda – but there was no threat to the people of Benghazi. Everything was a bluff. The 000 tanks of the government forces heading west had stopped the Benghazi rebels' attempts to take the oil installations at Ajdabiyah and Brega, but these 14 tanks had not been able to go in and take a city like Benghazi, with almost 14 inhabitants. Gaddafi had said all protesters should go free. He had threatened to kill Al Qaeda rebels and foreign agents. After eight weeks of fighting in Misrata, there were no more than 700 dead and nearly a thousand injured, three percent of whom were women (according to Human Rights Watch). Gaddafi's forces had not massacred civilians.
A few hundred young men died in the first few weeks as local rebels attacked or took over military bases in Benghazi, al-Bayda, Derna, Misrata and al-Zawiya. Some protesters were shot by unknown snipers, and black Libyans and many black immigrants were killed or hanged in the pillars of racist rebels. As in 2000, the events of February 2011 were primarily pogroms against black Africans. Those killed were not primarily protesters – they were black Americans who were believed to be supporting Gaddafi. At this time, there were far more protesters in Egypt (840 according to official information) who had been killed, but no one spoke of any military intervention in Egypt.
Against Gaddafi. The Western intervention in Libya had nothing to do with any upcoming massacres – it didn't even have anything to do with saving lives. It was about supporting a political mobilization against Gaddafi. Before Firstly, It supported human traffickers, who had lost millions since 2009, following Gaddafi's agreement with Italy. Before Secondly, supported racist groups in northern Libya (including Benghazi and Misrata), which saw how the number of blacks in Libya increased, and how Muammar Gaddafi used Libya's oil revenues to win the benevolence of African states to create a strong African Union. Benghazi and Misrata's identity belonged in the Arab world, not in Black Africa. Misrata rebels removed the black city of Tawargha from the map. Many blacks sought refuge in Gaddafi's hometown of Sirte.
The Norwegian Air Force acted as Al Qaeda's, the racist and the smugglers' weapons.
Secondly Thirdly, it supported Libya's Islamists who wanted to eliminate Gaddafi to create an Islamic state. Of all Al Qaeda fighters who had fought in Iraq, Saudis and Libyans were dominant. In Libya, the Al Qaeda fighters were mainly from Benghazi and Derna. They were the only Libyan rebels with war experience. After NATO and local militias eventually bombed Sirte and together, the Islamists went in with the same black and white flag used by IS in Iraq. In practice, the Norwegian Air Force acted as Al Qaeda's, the racist and human smugglers' air force – and that is what we are seeing results of today. These three interests from Benghazi and Misrata were united with American, British and French interests – which had sought to eliminate Gaddafi since the 70s. In 1996, the British, in collaboration with the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, had tried to blow Gaddafi into the air. In 2011, these Islamists were to lead the inauguration in Tripoli. But the Islamists did not exactly take orders from the British. The Islamists were led by thousands of Qatar special forces, which began arriving as early as March 2011, while the British commander traveled back and forth to Qatar to coordinate operations. When Tripoli was seized, Qatar's flag was hoisted over Gaddafi's piles. There were also forces from the Emirates, Jordan and not least from Sudan, the rebels said. It was these forces that were crucial. Gaddafi was self-serving, anti-Western and had Arab enemies. The assassination attempts of the 70s, 80s and 90s had made him paranoid, not to mention crazy. At the same time, Gaddafi sought to create an African Union with its own currency and military power – counterbalancing British and French colonial interests and against the United States Africom (Africa Command). In 2011, Gaddafi was old. His sons were soon to take over. This was probably viewed as a threat not only in Benghazi and Misrata, but also in London, Washington and Paris. Perhaps the sons would continue his African politics. The old slave owners from northern Libya experienced it as a betrayal. For the old colonial powers it was too risky to let this happen.
Accomplices. But in Norway, nothing was understood. The government was believed to have intervened to save human lives in Benghazi, and many inside NATO were probably of the same opinion. General Vigleik Eide, who had been a Norwegian defense commander and leader of NATO's military committee in the early 90s, said that he – as one of NATO's absolute highest generals – was not informed of sensitive matters. The British and Americans said nothing, he said. He was better informed as a Norwegian defense commander than as NATO's top general. The sensitive information is not in NATO. NATO never needed to know why a war was started in Libya. Those who knew were British and Americans, and maybe French. The Norwegians knew nothing – but in spite of that, Norway has a responsibility for the deaths of thousands of people, and they have a responsibility to have a state broken and together with disastrous consequences. Libya's state power has been replaced by Islamist-dominated areas, local armies and mafia structures, serving tens or hundreds of millions on human trafficking, sending tens of hundreds of people on a voyage that is very likely to end in death. Norwegian mass media discuss what to do with the thousands of people who die in the Mediterranean – but we do not discuss the fact that we are directly complicit in their death.
