The world community has one chance to redress the wrongs of the first decade of the Third Millennium, putting the lid on an imperialistic approach to international affairs and opening a new chapter, following a collective policy based upon dialogue and not stealing resources, implementing one law with an equal set of weights and measures for all.
September 19, 2011 is one of those deciding moments in history, tests which our collective socio-developmental vectors place in our path, trials we face and ordeals we have to overcome. Judgement as to how we performed comes much later and is written in the history book.
In the Libya Question, we have a clear choice: it is a choice of good over evil. It is also a chance to implement international law with the same set of weights and measures for all, it is a chance to close the chapter of imperialistic and colonialist adventures, it is a test as to whether the world community is mature enough to implement a multilateral approach to crisis management and resolution of disputes. Whether or not we pass this test and come through the ordeal with pride depends on the UN Security Council meeting as NATO's deadline runs out.
History will tell us whether the rest of the world stood idly by watching NATO collectively, and Britain and France in particular, launching a murderous assault upon a sovereign nation, yet again based upon lies and false flag events (the terrorists themselves committed the "massacres" and the Libyan Armed Forces did not bomb civilians - the one bombing civilians and committing massacre after massacre is NATO).
The future will tell us whether the western hemisphere's two Queens of Imperialism - Britain and France - whose collective histories are synonymous with countless massacres across the globe as they "civilised savages" with the Bible and the Bullet, were allowed to pursue a murderous policy based upon self interest and sheer greed. The Libya Question is not about freedom and democracy - why did Britain's David Cameron and France's Nicolas Sarkozy refuse the Jamahiriya's offer of a free election? The Libya Question is not about protecting civilians - how do you "protect civilians" by bombing them, destroying their water supply "to break their spirit", strafing their civilian infrastructures with military hardware to guarantee rebuilding contracts in a post-conflict scenario? How do you protect civilians by arming terrorists - in Britain's case, the Foreign and Commonwealth Office even lists one of the groups it is helping (the LIFG Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, al-Harakat al-Islamiya al-Libiya) as a terrorist organization, in direct conflict with the UK's own anti-terrorism laws. How do you help Africans by insulting the entire continent, aiding and abetting racists, which is what many in the TNC are? Let us not forget that the African holocaust was slavery - and guess who was behind that?
Tuesday September 20 will show us whether we wake up from this nightmare, in which two former imperialist powers launched a murderous terrorist attack based upon lies to stop Muammar al-Qathafi's developmental and humanitarian projects (for which he was set to receive a UN prize) in the African continent, projects which have already benefited millions, launching telemedicine programmes, opening e-learning centers and future schemes which would free Africans from crippling interest rate repayments to foreign banks.
True, these projects go against the selfish interests of Britain and France, for whom it is cheaper to launch this war than to help Africa develop. If on Monday September 19 our representatives allow NATO's murderous terrorist attack to proceed, then we can only conclude that they do not represent the hearts and minds of the world community and that it is time to put a stop to this violation of right and reason by a clique of corporate elitists who represent themselves and the few thousand policy makers, not us.
Yet they reside among nearly seven billion members of the world community, for whom many options remain open to build a world which is not only just but which follows international law and implements it equally.
On September 19, the world community has the obligation to terminate NATO's adventure, to use the UNO to implement a process of dialogue in which the Libyan people - including the Jamahiriya - sit down to construct a peace and reconciliation process. It would not be difficult, given that NATO's terrorist forces number at most between twenty to thirty thousand, including many mercenaries and foreigners and represent the political will of a small fraction of the Libyan people (which is why Cameron and Sarkozy and Obama refused to allow a humiliating democratic referendum, in which the Jamahiriya would certainly win a landslide victory).
On September 19, we will see whether the world community exists. If not, then we can conclude that international law does not exist. If not, the fighting will rage on in Libya, many more thousands of people will be killed, tribal fractures will become irreparable and the conflict will escalate into a regional one. France will lose any influence it retains in the area, Britain will see the tap granting it lucrative contracts in the African continent firmly closed off.
Moral of the story: If an intruder enters your home, rapes your wife and kills your kids, you fight back. Only if you are Cameron, Obama or Sarkozy to you hand him the keys. Moral 2: it has become obvious that the only way to avoid a cowardly terrorist attack by NATO is to arm yourself to the teeth and put yourself in a position whereby retaliation would be numbered in the hundreds of thousands, not a few dozen victims. Is this the world we want?
September 19, 2011. Trial by ordeal. Let us see whether the days of judging someone's guilt or innocence is still based upon the precept of the witch-hunt or whether we have finally managed to evolve into something more noble. This time around, doing nothing and sitting on the fence is paramount to taking part.
What subcategory of human being takes a knee on a handcuffed man, mashed face down on the pavement and, ultimately, forces him to die?