The Russian military claims that the supposed air strikes launched by Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi against protesters last week did not happen at all, suggesting that the key event seized upon by the global media as a justification for a “humanitarian” military intervention was a contrived hoax. According to Russia Today correspondent Irina Galushko, top officials from Russia’s Joint Chiefs of Staff monitoring images from space satellites have concluded that, “Some of the reports made by western media are not entirely corresponding to the pictures they are getting”. Specifically, the supposed air strikes that took place on February 22 over Benghazi and Tripoli, which were widely reported by the likes of the BBC and Al Jazeera, were not registered by the Russian military chiefs studying the images coming in from the satellites. The pictures show that, “nothing of that sort has been going on on the ground”, states Galushko, adding that there is also no evidence from footage shot by television cameras which suggests that any airborne attacks took place. Although there seems little doubt that Gaddafi’s regime is currently using air strikes to fight back against rebels who have seized eastern areas of the country, the initial claim that air strikes were used against protesters was unquestioningly parroted by the mass media last week despite there being scant evidence of such an attack.
 |
A Russian Satellite in orbit |
The horror of death raining down from above and slaughtering innocent people (let’s not mention predator drones), was endlessly hyped by western media and political leaders as a clear justification for a United States of Zionism and NATO-led military campaign to topple Gaddafi on “humanitarian” grounds, of course having nothing whatsoever to do with the fact that Libya holds the largest oil reserves in the whole of Africa. History tells us that almost every single conflict involving the United States of Zionism has been kick-started by a contrived pretext to justify military intervention, whether it be a pre-emptive attack or a so-called “humanitarian” campaign. “Humanitarian” wars are a lot easier to sell to the public because contrived crises focused around manipulating people’s emotions and empathy for human suffering are relatively simple to concoct. Who could forget the Iraqi incubator babies hoax, in which it was claimed that Saddam Hussein had ordered his henchmen to remove babies from their incubators in Kuwait and leave them for dead on hospital floors. The story was aggressively hyped by the western media and graciously exploited by George H.W. Bush for war propaganda before the first Gulf War.
Of course, the whole story was subsequently discovered to be a carefully crafted hoax cooked up by the Kuwaiti government in exile along with American PR firm Hill & Knowlton, led by by the firm’s CEO and former Bush staffer Craig Fuller, who was tasked to “devise a campaign to win American support for the war”. Similarly, Bill Clinton’s attack on Serbia in the 90′s was launched on the back of a fabricated controversy involving a Serbian relief camp that housed Bosnian refugees, which the media spun into being a Nazi-style “concentration camp” in which emaciated Bosnians were being imprisoned against their will. The footage broadcast by the global media was contrived so as to make it look as if the Bosnians were inside a barbed-wire enclosure, when in fact it was the British TV news crew who were inside the enclosure and who were filming through the barbed-wire to the outside, where Bosnians had gathered. The “emaciated concentration camp victim” was in fact a man with a natural birth defect.
