Libya "Before And After" Photos Go Viral

A Libyan man who took photos of himself posing at various spots across Beghazi in 2000 has revisited the same locations 18 years later to photograph life under the new "NATO liberated" Libya.

The "before and after" pics showing the utter devastation of post-Gaddafi Libya have gone viral, garnering 50,000 retweets after they were posted to an account that features historical images of Libya under Gaddafi’s rule between 1969 and 2011.

It appears people do still care about Libya even if the political elites in Paris, London, and Washington who destroyed the country have moved on. Though we should recall that British foreign secretary Boris Johnson was caught on tape in a private meeting last year saying Libya was ripe for UK investment, but only after Libyans "clear the dead bodies away."

We previously detailed in Libya's Slave Auctions And African Genocide: What Hillary Knew how Libya went from being a stable, modernizing secular state to a hellhole of roving jihadist militias, warring rival governments, and open-air slave auctions of captured migrants.

Yet what the viral photos confirm is that Libya was once a place of sprawling hotels, wide and clean city streets, functioning infrastructure, and lively neighborhoods. But these very places are now bullet-ridden ruins rotting amidst the political backdrop of the 'Mad Max' style chaos unleashed immediately after US-NATO's bombing the country into regime change.
Hillary still says that she has no regrets even after Obama timidly voiced a half-hearted and too-little-too-late Libya mea culpa of sorts in 2016.

Though Hillary's beloved Libyan Al Qaeda ..."rebels" — legitimized and empowered through broad support from the West — are now among the very militias hosting slave auctions and fueling the European refugee crisis, she's never so much as hinted that regime change in Libya left the country and much of the region in shambles. Instead, she simply chose to conclude her role in the tragic story of Libya with her crazed and gleeful declaration of "we came, we saw, he died."

Regime change enthusiasts everywhere please take note of what your blind jingoism has wrought.
A year before the NATO bombing of Libya the UN Development Programme (UNDP) assigned a Human Development Index (HDI) ranking of 53 to Libya (out of 169 countries ranked, Libya ranked highest on the African continent).
Right up until the eve of NATO's air campaign against the Libyan state, international media outlets understood and acknowledged the country's high human development rankings, though it later became inconvenient to present the empirical data. A February 2011 BBC report is a case in point.
The 2011 war and aftermath created a failed state with a once economically independent population now turned largely dependent on foreign aid and relief.

Currently considered to be at "emergency levels" of need, prior to NATO intervention Libya was not even on the Word Food Program's radar, yet is now considered a dire humanitarian disaster zone.

* * *

Among the few editorials written in major Western publications in the midst NATO's war on Libya warning of the consequences to come in real time was a 2011 piece for The Telegraph by Brendan O'Neill.

Though apparently now scrubbed from the internet [this no longer exists on The Telegraph site or in its archives: “The narcissism of the iPad imperialists who want to invade Libya,” Brendan O’Neill, The Telegraph (blogs), 25 February 2011], O'Neill's article is worth revisiting.

The article is preserved and quoted extensively in the book, Slouching Towards Sirte: NATO's War on Libya and Africa, which contains essential summary context laying out the role that international media played in 2011 and after in lying the public into war.

Below is an extensive excerpt from O'Neill's "The narcissism of the iPad imperialists who want to invade Libya"... relevant as ever when in comes to the West's continuing role in Libya, or in places like Syria, Yemen, or Afghanistan.

* * *

In a modern political sphere that has its fair share of narcissists and ignoramuses, no one is quite as narcissistic or as ignorant as the liberal interventionist. From the comfort of his Home Counties home, possibly to the sound of birds tweeting on the windowsill, the liberal interventionist will write furious, spittle-stained articles about the need to invade faraway countries in order to topple their dictators. As casually and thoughtlessly as the rest of us write shopping lists, he will pen a 10-point plan for the bombing of Yugoslavia or Afghanistan or Iraq and not give a second thought to the potentially disastrous consequences.

Now, having learned nothing from the horrors that they cheer-led like excitable teenage girls over the past 15 years, these bohemian bombers, these latte-sipping lieutenants, these iPad imperialists are back. This time they’re demanding the invasion of Libya. In the Guardian Ian Birrell brushes aside the eight-year nightmare of Iraq in one sentence – we shouldn’t be “scarred by the foolishness of the Iraq invasion”, he says – as he calls on the international community to spearhead a “rapid intervention” to save the people of Libya. It’s like an “apocalyptic Hollywood film” and there are even “rumours of systematic male rape”, he says, proving once again that there is no situation so bad that it cannot be made to sound even worse by hacks seeking to emotionally blackmail NATO into dropping a couple of tonnes of bombs.

Over at Slate, a headline sums up the outlook of Libya-concerned liberals: “It’s time to intervene.” Apparently world leaders can send a message to the broader Arab world by getting a grip on the Libyan crisis now. “Before the region descends into protracted civil conflict, the international community has the opportunity, in Libya, to set an important precedent and save thousands of lives in the process.” Meanwhile, a gaggle of human rights groups is calling on the UN and the EU to intervene to “protect Libyan civilians from government killings”. The White Man’s Burden is alive and well, it seems, though it has been thoroughly de-Kiplingised and turned into a super-liberal, PC endeavour.

The ignorance of liberal interventionists is captured in the fact that they seem to have wilfully forgotten the disastrous interventions of the past 15 years, all of which, from Yugoslavia to Afghanistan to Iraq, exacerbated local tensions and led to more, not less, bloodshed. It takes a special kind of arrogance to be able to demand yet another international military venture when the terrible consequences of your last one are still plain to see. And their narcissism is contained in the fact that the real reason they are making these demands for war is to make themselves feel good, to demonstrate that they care with a capital C. They know nothing of the countries that they want to see invaded, and care little about the potential of such invasions to destabilise things further. No, all that matters is that in saying “Forget Iraq, let’s now attack Gaddafi!”, they can publicly demonstrate their own moral indefatigability.

More pictures: https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-06-12/libya-and-after-photos-go-viral

 

Obama's legacy in action, very sad.

 

The right wing Boris Johnson shows yet again how right wingers used 9/11, the war on terror and the influence of the Zionist lobby to interfere in other countries. What is clear for any country is get nuclear weapons asap to stop this. If Libya had nuclear arms the desrtuction would not of taken place.

 

looks like Hillary installed air conditioning for them.

 

The Clinton Foundation are renovating lol

 

The clinton foundation has done wonderful things in libya. Why just look at these pictures...previously the rooms had tiny windows....now they all have floor to ceiling views of the skyline. Additionally the clinton foundation gave gaddafi a free colonoscopy and they never even got so much as a thank you. Sure there is some building code violations here but the violations probably got mixed up or lost when Hillary accidentally bleachbitted them.

 

I would simply like to remind everyone of what actually happened to Libya:

Anti-Gaddafi uprising
2011 February - Inspired by revolts in other Arab countries, especially neighbouring Egypt and Tunisia, violent protests break out in Benghazi, spread to other cities, leading to escalating clashes between security forces and anti-Gaddafi rebels.

2011 March - UN Security Council authorises a no-fly zone over Libya and air strikes to protect civilians, over which NATO assumes command.

Libyan rebels initially capture territory but are then forced back by better-armed pro-Gaddafi forces.

2011 July - The international Contact Group on Libya formally recognises the main opposition group, the National Transitional Council (NTC), as the legitimate government of Libya.

2011 August - Col Gaddafi goes into hiding after rebels swarm into his fortress compound in Tripoli.

2011 August-September - African Union joins 60 countries which have recognised the NTC as the new Libyan authority.

2011 20 October - Col Gaddafi is captured and killed as rebel fighters take his hometown Sirte. Three days later, the NTC declares Libya to be officially "liberated" and announces plans to hold elections within eight months.

2011 November - Saif al-Islam, the fugitive son of former Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, is captured, becoming the last key Gaddafi family member to be seized or killed.

Image copyright Getty Images
Image caption Col Gadaffi tried to hide in a drain but was captured and killed
2012 January - Clashes erupt between former rebel forces in Benghazi in sign of discontent with the pace and nature of change under the governing NTC. The deputy head of the NTC, Abdel Hafiz Ghoga, resigns.

2012 March - NTC officials in the oil-rich east, centred on Benghazi, launch a campaign to re-establish autonomy for the region, further increasing tension with the central NTC in Tripoli.

2012 June - Government struggles to control local militias, especially in Zintan in the West. The Al-Awfea Brigade briefly takes over Tripoli International Airport, and a pro-autonomy mob ransacks the election commission building in Benghazi.

2012 August - Transitional government hands power to the General National Congress, which was elected in July. The Congress elects Mohammed Magarief of the liberal National Front Party as its chairman, thereby making him interim head of state.

Benghazi attack
2012 September - US ambassador and three other Americans are killed when Islamist militants, including Ansar al-Sharia, storm the consulate in Benghazi.

Image copyright Getty Images
Image caption The US consulate in Benghazi was attacked and the ambassador killed
2012 October - National Congress elects Ali Zeidan, a liberal and leading opposition envoy during the civil war, to the post of prime minister.

2013 August - Petroleum Facilities Guard militia begins blockade of oil export terminals.

Civil war
2014 February - Protests erupt in response to the General National Congress refusal to disband after mandate expires.

2014 March - GNC sacks Prime Minister Ali Zeidan after a tanker laden with oil from a rebel-held port breaks through a Libyan navy blockade, elects businessman Ahmed Maiteg prime minister in heated scenes.

2014 April - Petroleum Facilities Guard militia lifts closure of two oil terminals.

2014 May - "Libyan National Army" renegade general Khalifa Haftar launches military assault including airstrikes against militant Islamist groups in Benghazi; tries to seize parliament building, accusing Prime Minister Maiteg of being in thrall to Islamist groups.

2014 June - Prime Minister Maiteg resigns after supreme court rules his appointment illegal.

New parliament chosen in elections marred by a low turn-out attributed to security fears and boycotts; Islamists suffer heavy defeat. Fighting breaks out between forces loyal to outgoing GNC and new parliament.

2014 July - UN staff pull out, embassies shut, foreigners evacuated as security situation deteriorates. Tripoli international airport is largely destroyed by fighting.

Ansar al-Sharia seizes control of most of Benghazi.

A little perspective seems important.

 

Obama made many mistakes. Must we remind ourselves?

Let's just pretend 2009-2017 never happened.

 

If only we could get back the Trillions

 

Yes indeed perspective is important and as your post shows militant islamist were attempting to take over Libya and Obama-hillary decided to help them do so.

 

…..Uh….Okay, if YOU say so it must be true....NOT.

 

I think its more likely that Obama and Clinton were so incompetent that they did not realize they were helping the radical islamists take over Libya. That was their MO just about everywhere else...make a mess due to arrogance and incompetence and they walk away claiming no responsibility for they have created.

 

In reality (which seems to have escaped you) the Libyan people decided they wanted their leadership removed and the United States wanted to help them do so. The President and SOS do not implement military choices beyond setting policy and issuing orders, they are not soldiers or generals. In this case both were forced to accomplish goals with depleted resources designated by Congress and diplomatic/Embassy staff were extremely thin as a result. Fortunately NATO also stepped up in support of the Libyans which helped but due to a fractured population no one was capable of creating a strong enough Government as seems typical in Muslim nations. Basically the history and culture created by Islam is not conducive to peaceful coexistence in a population which means any attempt at imposing a more free and accepting society will fail.
Neither Obama or Clinton were in a position to control or even impact what was happening and when Obama attempted to do the right thing by getting Congressional approval before engaging he was rejected. All of this is very easily verified if you choose to do so but I have a feeling you will not, preferring instead to spew your narrative.

 

So what you are saying is basically what I said. Obama and Clinton were so incompetent that they did not realize they were helping the radical islamists take over Libya. .

 

Because only Obama and Clinton trashed countries. Sure thing buddy. Does the Iraq war count? Does arming rebels to fight Afghanistan count? The U.S. has been crapping on these countries for decades. People pointing fingers at Obama and Clinton have no sense of history.

 

Sure Iraq counts. Bush trashed the place for no very good reason and created a huge problem but he didn't then walk away like Obama and Clinton did from their mistakes. Saddam was the right man for Iraq. Some of us knew that at the time. I was very opposed to the overthrow of Saddam's regime and I've never got more than lukewarm about the adventure in Afghanistan.

 

so you blame the Jews.

 

Why is it that if Muslims attempt to overthrow a dictator, they are automatically labelled militant islamists and terrorists?

 

Mexico beats Germany 1-0

 

I think you are obsessed, read it again.

 

They aren't necessarily. When Saddam overthrew the existing Baathist regime in Iraq in 1979 his action was not described as an islamist act. You should read more history on the region.

 

yes, I read your frequent codeword for "the Jews"

 

Looks like that is all you saw Ronstar, the rest of the sentence does not appear to of registered, but whenever you see Zionist you assume Jew, that is your problem not mine, deal with it.

 

We didn't walk away from Iraq? Besides a skeleton crew, yes we did.

 

Bush didn't. He stayed and tried to fix the mess he made. Of course he had no Saddam Hussein in his tool bag to fix the place with. Obama abandoned Iraq as I recall in 2011. You are making my points for me or else we see this in a similar light???