Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Gaddafi regime fed names of jihadists to the CIA and to Britain
The Australian ^ | March 22, 2011 | Alexi Mostrous

Posted on 03/22/2011 3:06:36 PM PDT by Virginia Ridgerunner

COLONEL Muammar Gaddafi's regime secretly provided information to Britain and the US on Islamic extremists in the east of Libya, according to leaked diplomatic cables and intelligence sources.

The names of hundreds of suspects were passed to the CIA and British intelligence.

“There was a strong, shared concern between Gaddafi and the US and UK Governments about radical Sunni jihadist terrorists, including the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG),” Paul Pillar, a CIA veteran who negotiated with Libya over its nuclear program, told The Times.

Diplomatic cables obtained by WikiLeaks paint eastern Libya as a fertile ground for radical extremism. One source told US officials in 2008 that for young men from Derna, a city east of Benghazi, “resistance against coalition forces in Iraq was an important act of 'jihad' and a last act of defiance against the Gaddafi regime”.

(Excerpt) Read more at theaustralian.com.au ...


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: 2008; ansaralsharia; arabspring; economy; gaddafi; globalism; jihad; libya; lifg; oil; palin; qaddafi
Related:

Libya: the West and al-Qaeda on the same side

Saving the Libyan Islamists

Libyan Islamists 'join al-Qaeda'

Al Qaeda sets up 'Islamic emirate' (in Libya)

Al Qaida's Foreign Fighters in Iraq (U.S. Military Academy Study Based on Captured Documents from Iraq)

Al-Qaeda commander calls for overthrow of Gaddafi and introduction of Sharia Law

1 posted on 03/22/2011 3:06:41 PM PDT by Virginia Ridgerunner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Virginia Ridgerunner

East Libya. Coincidentally, that also happens to be the center of today’s rebel opposition to the regime.


2 posted on 03/22/2011 3:11:32 PM PDT by skeeter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Virginia Ridgerunner
“There was a strong, shared concern between Gaddafi and the US and UK Governments about radical Sunni jihadist terrorists"

Strong emphasis on the word was.

ML/NJ

3 posted on 03/22/2011 3:13:40 PM PDT by ml/nj
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Virginia Ridgerunner

So we (and by “we” I mean Obama) are helping along the dream of the New Caliphate. Sweet.


4 posted on 03/22/2011 3:14:05 PM PDT by PENANCE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Virginia Ridgerunner

Well gadaffi would do or say everything just to stay in power.
This is for shure.
There is no need to give special attention to his last attempt.
But anyway our war in libya is wrong.


5 posted on 03/22/2011 3:15:31 PM PDT by darkside321
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: skeeter
Qaddafi was right when he said that Al Qaeda was responsible for the first 'rebel' attacks against his regime. But because he's a murderous thug himself, nobody believed him.

The U.S., France, and Britain now find themselves in the ridiculous situation of fighting for Al Qaeda.

6 posted on 03/22/2011 3:15:58 PM PDT by Virginia Ridgerunner (Sarah Palin has crossed the Rubicon!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Virginia Ridgerunner

Looks more like Obama’s at war with the War On Terror


7 posted on 03/22/2011 3:16:56 PM PDT by tsowellfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ml/nj
From the article:

"Close political and intelligence co-operation continued until last year despite the US State Department condemning Libya for oppression and human rights abuses in 2009."

8 posted on 03/22/2011 3:17:44 PM PDT by Virginia Ridgerunner (Sarah Palin has crossed the Rubicon!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Virginia Ridgerunner
But because he's a murderous thug himself, nobody believed him.

This information has been known since at least before we went into Iraq. Libya was one of those unnamed nations assisting the US in the War On Terror. I guess Bush must have forgotten to relay that to Obama.

I'm surprised Bush has yet to call Obama.

9 posted on 03/22/2011 3:20:41 PM PDT by tsowellfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Virginia Ridgerunner

The U.S., France, and Britain now find themselves in the ridiculous situation of fighting for Al Qaeda.

Unless we fight against the al qaeda insurgency following the ousting of Qadaffi. We did it in Iraq, and hopefully we’ll at least put up a fight with them after this, but then again, that is HOPEFULLY, and not certain.


10 posted on 03/22/2011 3:32:17 PM PDT by Morpheus2009 (I pity the fool - Mr. T)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Morpheus2009
We did it in Iraq, and hopefully we’ll at least put up a fight with them after this

Not with this President.

11 posted on 03/22/2011 3:34:33 PM PDT by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Virginia Ridgerunner

sounds like we’re backing the worse of two evils


12 posted on 03/22/2011 3:34:46 PM PDT by hecht (TAKE BACK OUR NATION AND OUR NATIONAL ANTHEM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tsowellfan
The sad thing is that Gates, Donilon, and Brennan knew that Al Qaeda was responsible, but got shouted down by Hillary, Susan Rice, and Samantha Powers.

Obama Takes Hard Line With Libya After Shift by Clinton

In joining Ms. Rice and Ms. Power, Mrs. Clinton made an unusual break with Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates, who, along with the national security adviser, Thomas E. Donilon, and the counterterrorism chief, John O. Brennan, had urged caution. Libya was not vital to American national security interests, the men argued, and Mr. Brennan worried that the Libyan rebels remained largely unknown to American officials, and could have ties to Al Qaeda.

The bottom line is that this is now the State Department's war, and the Defense Department is reluctantly following Obama's orders.

And note, that in his public addresses about the war, Obama uses weasel words to avoid stating that HE ordered the attacks.

President Obama just sent this letter to Congress

See also THIS:

Sr. WH Official on Libya: Obama 'straining' truth; "Huge gamble" may benefit al Qaeda

13 posted on 03/22/2011 3:37:01 PM PDT by Virginia Ridgerunner (Sarah Palin has crossed the Rubicon!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: tsowellfan

“But because he’s a murderous thug himself, nobody believed him.

This information has been known since at least before we went into Iraq. Libya was one of those unnamed nations assisting the US in the War On Terror. I guess Bush must have forgotten to relay that to Obama.

I’m surprised Bush has yet to call Obama.”

Honestly, the whole Middle East is the equivalent of Hell’s Kitchen on Earth, chalk full of numerous parties killing each other. As far as Bush is concerned, I am surprised that his Secretary of Defense Robert Gates did not relay information from his time as a Bush advisor and gatherer of intelligence to Obama as the next president. Chances are pretty high that Bush assumed that his own Secretary of Defense would do just that, as he passed on from his administration to the Obama administration, with plenty of the information reviewed back then. Anyways, that’s my speculation.


14 posted on 03/22/2011 3:45:46 PM PDT by Morpheus2009 (I pity the fool - Mr. T)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Virginia Ridgerunner

I see

So since Dictators and others who accept torture as a cost of doing business are the best at fighting terror,then we should continue to cede power to our Federal government tell them to do as they fit with suspected terrorists.

If the only way to fight terror was to accept fascism then I am sure we could curtail personal liberties till our leaders see fit to tell us we can have them back.

Like I said what Gaddafi does in Libya,is what will happen and what has been happening here.He represents an ally to the dark side of the West,that pit of ignorance called liberalism.Let the West bring the walls down on him,hopefully it will allows us to get rid of these “Iscarians” within our midst.


15 posted on 03/22/2011 3:59:26 PM PDT by Del Rapier
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Virginia Ridgerunner



16 posted on 03/22/2011 4:08:06 PM PDT by familyop ("Dry land is not just our destination, it is our destiny!" --"Deacon," "Waterworld")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hecht

“sounds like we’re backing the worse of two evils”

a little Q and A:

Q: Which is more of a threat to the West, Arab dictators or radical islam?
A: Radical islam, by far

Q: Name three sworn enemies of radical islam.
A. the Shah or Iran, Saddam Hussein, and Moammar Gaddafi

Q. So those three are allies of the West?
A. No! The West brought them down, of course!


17 posted on 03/22/2011 4:25:53 PM PDT by Leaning Right (Why am I carrying this lantern, you ask. I am looking for the next Reagan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Leaning Right

You need to lean a little further. It’s not clear which direction you are headed towards.

There is a lot we do not know about the true situation in Libya. To you and others - hold off on the premature speculation. It’s a discipline your spouse will appreciate in time.


18 posted on 03/22/2011 4:52:59 PM PDT by neocon1984
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Virginia Ridgerunner

Well, he inslulted Widdle Barry and he’s an enemy of fervent Muslims who pursue rightous jihad. By all means, the man has to go!! /sarc


19 posted on 03/22/2011 4:54:25 PM PDT by Rashputin (Barry is totally insane and being kept medicated and on golf courses to hide the fact)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neocon1984
There is a lot we do not know about the true situation in Libya

Agreed. But I'll bet you a dollar that in five years Lybia will not be the pleasant parliamentary democracy Obama hopes for.

And here's something I don't have to wait five years to say: The entire world was better off leaving the Shah of Iran in place. And that includes the Iranian people.

But we in the West just can't resist preaching and meddling.

PS I can't understand we some folks make fun of another's screen name. It doesn't advance arguments one bit. In fact, it's kind of juvenile.

20 posted on 03/22/2011 5:03:26 PM PDT by Leaning Right (Why am I carrying this lantern, you ask. I am looking for the next Reagan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Leaning Right
Q: Name three sworn enemies of radical islam. A. the Shah or Iran, Saddam Hussein, and Moammar Gaddafi

Unbelievable.

Gaddafi has a long track record of promoting radical Islam outside of his borders.

Link

21 posted on 03/22/2011 6:35:28 PM PDT by FreeReign
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Virginia Ridgerunner
A quick look at some of your links shows that the "Al Qaeda is in E. Libya" claim is coming from Gaddafi and his own officials.

Perhaps I haven't read the good stuff yet.

22 posted on 03/22/2011 6:56:02 PM PDT by FreeReign
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Virginia Ridgerunner
Your third link does show useful information that FIGL is becoming part of Al Qaeda.


23 posted on 03/22/2011 7:01:05 PM PDT by FreeReign
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Virginia Ridgerunner

Separated at birth?

24 posted on 03/22/2011 7:52:29 PM PDT by ScottinVA (Imagine.... a world without islam.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FreeReign
Gaddafi has a long track record of promoting radical Islam outside of his borders.

OK, assuming that your link is an unbiased one, let us then ask why Gaddafi is supporting radical islam.

Is it because he dreams of an AQ caliphate, encompassing all of the middle east, including his own country?

Does he dream of handing off power in Libya to an ayatollah (instead of to one of his sons)?

I'd argue that the answer to these two questions is obviously no. Then why does Gaddafi give any support to radical islam? To do below-the-public-radar damage to the West.

So, sure, Gaddafi is no friend, just as Saddam Hussein was no friend. But IMHO they are much less dangerous than the alternative, a string of radical islamic states.

And no, I do not buy the Bush 2 argument that the alternative to Arab dictatorship is Western-style democracy. Ain't gonna happen.

25 posted on 03/23/2011 7:17:29 AM PDT by Leaning Right (Why am I carrying this lantern, you ask. I am looking for the next Reagan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: All
The missing piece...

Libya Islamists 'seize arms, take hostages' (This is how it all started--with an Al Qaeda attack)

26 posted on 03/25/2011 7:34:15 AM PDT by Virginia Ridgerunner (Sarah Palin has crossed the Rubicon!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Virginia Ridgerunner; Travis McGee; TigerClaws

ping


27 posted on 10/31/2012 11:00:08 PM PDT by piasa (Attitude adjustments offered here free of charge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson