Where are the 12,000 US Soldiers on Malta?

A few days ago, on 13 January 2012, Cynthia McKinney, a former six-term member of US Congress, wrote on her blog:

It is with great disappointment that I receive the news from foreign media publications and Libyan sources that our President now has 12,000 U.S. troops stationed in Malta and they are about to make their descent into Libya.

Unfortunately, she doesn’t reveal any of her sources.

Cynthia McKinney: “I really have no idea what I am talking about.”

As a resident of Malta, I can guarantee her – and you – that this is untrue. There are no 12,000 US soldiers stationed on Malta. And trust me, this island is so small, I would have seen them. There isn’t enough space for 12,000 troops to hide, especially not if they have the typical soldiers’ equipment of tanks, artillery, helicopters et cetera with them. – To put things into perspective: the whole military of Malta is 2,140 troops strong. Even at the height of World War II, when Malta was hotly fought over as the central location in the Mediterranean, no more than 26,000 troops were stationed on Malta.

Granted, I did see the USS Whidbey Island in port in Valletta last Friday, but this ship only has a crew of about 400 sailors.

Also, I can’t see why US forces would go to Libya now. Gaddafi is dead, Libya is liberated, the job is done.

Ms McKinney either has no idea about international politics and the state of the world, or she is one of these conspiracy gurus, or she doesn’t know where Malta is and confused it with something else. Either way, it’s very embarrassing for a former US Congresswoman to make these ridiculous statements.

But just in case, people of Malta: let’s keep our eyes open in the next few weeks for any suspicious activity on the ground, on the sea and in the air. If you spot anything, please let me know.

“I am trying to hide on Malta. And so are 11,999 of my comrades.”

(I have contacted Ms McKinney and asked her to comment on her statement. As she has not allowed me to make a clarifying comment on her blog, I doubt however that we will hear from her. Until she comes up with the next bogus story.)

About Andreas Moser

Travelling the world and writing about it. I have degrees in law and philosophy, but I'd much rather be a writer, a spy or a hobo.
This entry was posted in Libya, Malta, Military, Politics, USA and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

72 Responses to Where are the 12,000 US Soldiers on Malta?

  1. Gilberto Arredondo says:

    If 20 American soldiers were in Malta we’d all know.

  2. Mary Borg says:

    (writing from Malta) They’re here … I know they’re here, with a little help from the Hollywood guys. Acting on advise from American Intelligence, the people who made “Honey, I Shrunk The Kids” gave their secret potion to the US military and they brought the 12,000 troops over in a small, shoe-box size box to the Island via diplomatic mail. At the right moment they will bring them back to normal size again. The only problem is that it’s still unknown where all their apparatus and military gear is.

  3. Lillian Smith says:

    Malta included the territorial waters also. So technically, troops on an aircraft carrier or other naval vessels, could be said to be in Malta.

    And the new US Embassy in Malta could have large underground bunkers, enough to accommodate a large number of personnel. This is nothing new for such bunkers are documented to exist both in the US mainland and military outposts abroad.

    Instead of making jest of leaked information, it might be better to think outside the box. And just because Gaddaffi is no more, there is still internal fighting going on in Libya, and who knows how this is inpacting Western interests in that country, mainly the Oil industry, which pie has been split amongst the hungry Western Oil giants.

  4. Dear Andreas,

    There are currently NATO & US forces occupying Libya. They have been there since the early days of the crisis and won’t be leaving. The goal of the mission was not just illegal regime change, it was also an ethnic cleansing program particularly targeting black-skinned Libyans and anyone resisting neo-colonial rule, and installing a corporatist puppet ‘government’ guaranteeing unhindered access to Libya’s vast natural resources.

    Libyans never asked to be “liberated” from the direct democracy created by Muammar Gaddafi. They never asked for their Great Man Made River to be bombed along with the factory that built the parts. A coalition of monarchists, “Islamists,” and CIA elements declared far in advance a “day of rage” in which a small band of criminals attacked police stations and government offices in Benghazi. Libyans never asked to be bombed, murdered, raped, imprisoned by NATO/UAE/US/UN occupiers and yet this is what is going on today.

    • Isn’t it funny how people who blog from a free, democratic country want to deny the same freedom and democracy to people in other countries?
      Everybody saw Libyans protest against Gaddafi’s dictatorship, take up arms against Gaddafi’s dictatorship and finally – with some help from NATO – overthrow the brutal regime of Gaddafi.
      Nobody occupies Libya; it is free. At no point of the civil war was there a large number of foreign military in Libya.

    • 1) Muammar Gaddafi was not a dictator. He overthrew a colonialist-imposed monarch (King Idris) and brought direct democracy to Libya. Libya’s full name was “Libyan Arab Jamahiriya” — Jamahiriya refers to a “state of the masses” where people organize themselves into small, local people’s councils to make decisions. In 1977, 8 years after the bloodless coup that propelled him to power, Gaddafi stepped down from any official position within the government. He had no legislative authority, and only served as a figurehead and spiritual leader of the revolution. Gaddafi proposed depositing all profits from oil directly into the accounts of Libyan citizens to tackle corruption. That proposal was rejected by “reformers” who now make up the current “National Transitional Council.” How would that happen in a dictatorship? In 2006, he was praised as a champion of democracy in a conversation with Columbia University academics: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zg5TBi59Ghg&feature=player_embedded

      2) Please look at Libya’s progress between 1969 and 2010. Before Gaddafi’s revolution, Libya was the poorest nation on the planet. It is now the wealthiest and most developed in Africa (including South Africa), and tops Russia, Mexico, China, Brazil and some countries in Eastern Europe. This is confirmed by the UN.

      Gaddafi also brought tremendous social progress to Libya, granting for the first time women the right to divorce, to participate in the political process and take governmental posts. One only needs to look to Sudan to see what can go wrong in a country with a diverse racial population. Libya has a large percentage of black-skinned citizens, and they too gained many rights. Racism played a big part in the war on Libya. Here’s what happened in the black-majority city of Tawergha.

      3) The NATO-backed “rebels” were not fighting for freedom or democracy. The flag they carried was that of the old monarch King Idris. Benghazi was traditionally an anti-Gaddafi, pro-Idris city. It was also a center of al Qaeda recruiting. Please read more about the nature of the “rebels” and the crimes they have committed against the Libyan people.

      What was presented as humanitarians “helping” a “democratic” opposition was actually the largest military alliance the world has ever known (NATO) taking on a small, revolutionary government to benefit their corporate backers.

    • When was the last time you were in Libya?

  5. Lillian Smith says:

    Andreas, you would never know if there are any naval vessels in Maltese waters. I personally was on one US aircraft carrier and given a tour. I was informed that there were many top-secret features that the ship carried that they could not divulge, but one of the things they showed us was that they had a way to make the aircraft carrier invisible – that is they would not be seen by radar etc and can move about by stealth. And that was more than twenty years ago!

    As for underground bunkers, I have seen pictures and films of these and are quite extensive and could hold thousands in comfort underground for many months, if not years. With the military bugdets of the world superpowers (and this does not include the black-budgets) why is it so hard to believe, after all they are not doing any research to better the lives of mankind, all research is done for military applications only and it is only by chance that some are applied for domestic use, e.g. jet aircrafts, heat resistant ceramics, radar, atomic power – all were the products of military research. Most research is done with the military in mind. Even research funded in Universities, for example one research project conducted was to see if humans can detect object in front of them the dark (or blind) the implication being that they want to better the lives of blind people. It was only half way through the program that it was revealed that the study was being sponsored and done to help the military, that it for military applications. Same can be said for psychic research and use of LSD and other mind-control drugs.

    • It’s actually quite easy to know where aircraft carriers are. There is a limited number of them and all of them are continuously accounted for by the Department of Defence.

      There are no invisible aircraft carriers. Stealth capability does not mean invisibility like the guy in the fairy tale with a magic cap.

    • And the 12,000 soldiers were also stealth/invisible when they came on shore?

  6. Pingback: utländsk invasion av Libyen förestående? «

  7. Lillian Smith says:

    Well I am a cynic and a skeptic. I am sure the US Defense Department are going to tell you were they place all their ships and indeed how many they actually have of them. Stealth could mean invisible and more. For example, I believe that UFO’s are just top secret military craft and not alien spacecraft. Real technology is much more advanced then they let on, at least 60 years ahead and is only used for military applications. So, I keep an open mind about this and more importantly, I never believe official statements or figures.

    And what do you think, that the soldiers are going to come ashore like they did on D-Day? All you would need is to fly helicopters or aircraft on the landing pad on a base, and the soldiers could go underground in the bunkers to await further orders.

  8. “Andreas Moser says:
    17 January 2012 at 20:03
    When was the last time you were in Libya?”

    When was the last time you actually read and reflected upon an opposing viewpoint, instead of just trying to turn the subject to the person making the comment — as you did both times I commented? This isn’t about me or you. It’s about an unimaginable atrocity being carried out against the Libyan people in the name of “democracy.”

  9. Lillian Smith says:

    I have to conclude the Nina Westbury has some valid points. It is obvious that NATO/EU/US did not go into Libya just to defend its citizens. They went there for the Oil, pure and simple. If Democracy and human rights were the case, why have they not yet invaded Syria? Yes, because Syria has no appreciable amount of oil to be of interests to the West, so Assad can go on killing his citizens and the West is just monitoring the situation. Can you spell hypocrisy?

    Gaddaffi was dictator of Libya for over forty years, and right or wrong he did manage to keep the country secular. And why was he taken out when he thought he was on the right track with the West, why it does not seem so long ago that he was hob-nobbing with Berlusconi and was the toast of the town at the G8. He was rehabilitated and even had deals with multi-national oil companies going? Did the West just now realize that he was a murderer and dictator?

    And by the way, why do you need to be physically in Libya or any other place for that matter to know what is actually going on.

    I am by no means defending Gaddaffi for he was a ruthless dictator, but no more so than the countless other dictatorships that the West pawns over, such as Saudi Arabia.

  10. Lillian Smith says:

    Base, embassy call it what you want.

    Have you every been to Malta? Is this in the same vein as ‘when was the last time I was in Libya”.
    Does one actually have to be from the place to comment on your blog? But in answer to your question, yes of course.

    • So if you have been to Malta, may I ask: Where in Malta would you hide 12,000 troops plus military hardware? Where exactly?

    • guzepasswordNo13 says:

      Why does the USA embassy that was close to Valletta move to an ex RAF iarfield (Ta` Qali ),that after Malta became constitutionaly a Neutral and non alliened republic turned into a peacefull crafts village and recreational park ?

      And since when does an embassy needs a very large building fit for a concorde?
      Most other embassies from allover the world are concentrated in one building in Ta` Xbiex. What do you say ANdreas Moser?

  11. Lillian Smith says:

    If I were to hide troops, they would be in underground bunkers (by the way, check out the fact that Malta is almost all hollowed out with underground passages from the time of the Knights and some from times before). The Maltese population, thousands of them also hid in shelters during the war and some of these are also quite extensive. Obviously, the bunkers would not be like these places but state-of the-art. And the soldiers can also come up and move around on sightseeing etc dressed in their civilian clothes. As to the military hardware, it is probably ready and waiting for them in Libya (not such a big a problem as you might make it out to be) or it will be brought to them once they are there. This is of course hypothetical but it is nice to conjure up and show that it is not as impossible as you are making it out to be.

  12. Esther S. says:

    Cynthia McKinney says in the article: “I hope the report that I’m reading from 12 January 2012 is not true. I hope our President has not sent 12,000 troops of occupation to Malta destined for Libya .”

    Obviously, she is not claiming that it is so, but extremely concerned it might be so. I personally find it strange that her genuine fear is met with sarcasm by the writer and some commentors while referring to Libya free now, disregarding the fact that there is still fighting and killing going on and that it is quite possible NATO will go in again to secure what they came to accomplish in the first place. NATO gave more than “a little help”; it took months of bombing by the most sophisticated military powers in the world to overthrow and assassinate Ghaddafi. How do you explain that if so many of his own people were against him? Are you aware that an investigation of war crimes by NATO forces and rebels is being made?

    All-or-nothing thinking ignores the possibility that the intelligence is partly true. Perhaps the troops are somewhere close by, perhaps they are elsewhere.

    Or perhaps it is not true at all! But, in any case, sarcastic remarks fail to convince, in fact, they trigger suspicion. Neither the Western allies nor the corporate media can be trusted so that any voice which contradicts this cacophony of lies must be heard, if there is the slightest chance that (additional) genocide can be avoided.

    • To write alarming reports and then adding a clause “I hope none of this is true” is another way of admitting that one has no idea what one is writing about or that one deliberately spreads false claims. Like Cynthia McKinney does.

  13. Rene Levasseur says:

    It is not unfeasble to have 12 000 troops stationed in Malta for rapid deployment. This scenario may be possible, because 12 000 troops are exiting/have exited Iraq. Although the archepelagoe is small, the population is 400 000, and there is a yearly turnover of tourists in excess of half a million. Hence, these troops could have arrived as soldiers vacationing on leave, and never left. There are Nato bases in Southern Italy from which the US could standup. However, this will take away the element of sursprise offerred by the vicinity of Malta and its neutrality in matters involving the wars of others. However, it will come as no surprise that this is true because the present government is quiet willing to lend its support to the U.S. in spite of the declared neutrality of the country, which is something the majority of the population want to maintain. This will explain the denial of the government about the presence of these troops.

    • The US troops that have left Iraq are in Kuwait.
      To get 12,000 soldiers plus equipment from Kuwait to Malta would surely be noticed by someone.

  14. Lillian Smith says:

    Well said Rene.

    It is true, it is so easy to circumvent Malta’ neutrality clause as per the Constituition, The NATO/French war planes were continuously runnig out of fuel when they went out on sorties to bomb Libya, and of course for humanitarian reasons, Malta had to allow them to land and refuel. LOL

    And do not forget that in a short space of time McCann came to Malta twice from Afghanistan on his way to the USA and I do not think it was just to see the Neolithic Temples.

  15. daddyfatsacks says:

    Ockham’s razor states the hypothesis with the least presumptions is the correct one, unless further evidence states otherwise.

  16. You also can not see people’s brain !! Can you conclude that brain
    doesn’t exist??? It might be that those troops are there hidden

    • Of course I can see people’s brain: it’s in their head, underneath the skin, surrounded by the skull.

    • “hidden somewhere” seems to be the standard answer of people who have never been to Malta. Isn’t it odd that none of them can suggest a specific location?

  17. Rene Levasseur says:

    Are these 12000 US troops actually in Malta and where are they hidden? These are 2 good questions. However, the political and strategic scenarios makes it a very viable possibility. Both the US and Malta have business interests in Libya, oil being the primary one. The logistical accomodation of these troops is plausible. There are vacant British military barracks that can be readily cordoned off, and not to forget the huge US embassy. (Why is the US embassy so large for such a small place?). For rapid deployment as an occupyng force, these toops would carry their equipment on their back. They will not need humvees and field artillery. These can be parachuted later. I speak from my own personal military experience in combat arms. Hence, the question should be not where are these troops being hidden, but it had better not be true.

  18. Lillian Smith says:

    I think one can safely rule out Okhkam’s Razor when dealing with projects that involve corporate sponsored military coups aided and abetted by “democratic’ nations – you can be darn sure everything has been well planned and thought out months in advance. they will not leave things to chance.

  19. Pingback: I discovered the 12,000 US troops on Malta. | The Happy Hermit – Andreas Moser's Blog

  20. Pingback: Where malta | Wiseupnow

  21. I have to apologise to all the commentators on here: you may have been right, and I may have been wrong. I discovered (and photographed) the first evidence of US military on Malta today: https://andreasmoser.wordpress.com/2012/01/18/12000-us-troops-discovered-on-malta/

  22. Adrian says:

    Although 12,000 U.S. troops is a little exaggerated, i think that something fishy is happening. I live in Mosta (Malta) and sometimes i hear military planes (with propellers) passing by, and not one but many. Before the Libya issue, these planes were never passing by that frequently. I will try to take a video of them and send it to you.

    Have a great day :)

  23. Mary Sammut says:

    This is so funny. I am Maltese so I know a little bit about this island. Mr. Moser take my advice, do not argue with fools. It will not get you anywhere and you run the risk to get so mentally exhausted and so discouraged that by the end of the day you will begin to feel and sound like a fool.

  24. reminds me of those maoists who “discovered” secret Soviet military installations everywhere during the mid-1970ies

  25. Esther S. says:

    @ Andreas Moser The sarcasm in your responses, even if camouflaged by cute photos, makes me wonder about your deep-down stance as a human being, an issue which goes beyond the question whether it is physically possible to have thousands of troops in Malta or nearby.

    Is it not obvious to you that the fear of troops in Malta expresses a wish to avoid more slaughter of innocent people? Your questions “Have you ever been to Malta or to Libya?” show that you are oblivious to the underlying longing for peace and humanity – certainly not issues which deserve contempt.

    Sarcasm, as I know from personal experience as well as from studies, kills communication and relationships, mainly because it involves a belief in the superiority of one’s own thoughts or being. At the base of sarcasm lies All-or-nothing thinking, e.g.:”(All) conspiracy theories are ridiculous”, as you have implicitly said. Never mind that we have been lied to by our governments for decades, never mind that the wars have been aggressive, while they were sold to us as battles for democracy and freedom. Never mind they violate international laws. Never mind they kill more civilians than soldiers!

    Are your responses merely an expression of shallow thinking and wanting to be right or are you consciously – or even ‘deliberately spreading false claims’, such as “People who oppose my (or my group’s, leader’s, government’s) opinions deserve my or the world’s contempt”, “Pacifists are fools”, or whatever your convictions may be?

    The problem of felt superiority is, of course, also a global one. The time has come to ask ourselves: Am I on the side of respectful communication and an effort in increased understanding of others or am I on the side of ridicule, sarcasm, and demonization, the latter of which provide an excuse for attack and – ultimately – slaughter and genocide?

  26. Lillian Smith says:

    Maria Sammut we are not arguing with Andreas. We are discussing. There is a big difference.

    Andeas finds it much easier to dismiss anything that does not fit into his narrow world view as ‘a conspiracy theory’ as many ill-informed people also tend to do. However, Andreas is not ill-informed, which leads me to believe that he actually approves of the New World Order, which has at the heart of its belief a disdain and contempt for humanity in general and an elitist agenda.

    • I provided an evidence-based argument supporting Muammar Gaddafi and the Libyan Jamahiriya. Andreas chose not to consider any of it and instead asked a pointed and irrelevant question designed to undermine my integrity as a commenter. That’s his right as the author of this blog, but it does speak volumes about his character. Looking through the rest of his blog, it is clear that Andreas proudly shills for every globalist cause disguised in ‘humanitarian’ rhetoric — from war with Iran to capitalist reunification of the Korean province. His agenda is not just “elitist” it is based on the exploitation of the vast majority of humanity at the hands of a tiny and all-powerful group — mostly, but not exclusively, comprising of white North Americans and Europeans. It is unsustainable for the planet, and would require mass genocide in order to prevent successful revolts based on numbers alone.

    • Lillian Smith says:

      Nina, the New World Order is very real and its stated aims are just as you have described.

      Here is a link to a video of the late Aaron Russo, hollywood film producer, and what he has to say about NWO.

  27. Doctor J says:

    Is anyone surprised? Everything McKinney claims is a lie…

  28. golfer says:

    i can confirm that at least 5 military type aircrafts took off today between 1400 and 1500 or was it the same one on a test flight???

    • Adrian (Malta) says:

      Yes i saw them too and this is not the first time that they are landing after the Libya civil war.

  29. Lillian Smith says:

    Under the guise of finding a cure for bird flu, scientists have created a virus strain that can be passed from human to human (the big epidemic of a few years ago did not take place because the virus simple did not spread from person to person but only through contact with infected fowl).

    Now that they have perfected it, the scenario is already set and “terrorists” willl of course be blamed for stealing the new virus from the heavily secured laboratories.LOL

    Germ and bio-weapons have long be the subject of heavily funded research, as these can effectively cull large numbers of human populations. It is also interesting to note that the pharma company Sanofi-Pasteur who are heavy in the production of flue vaccines are whole owned by the Rockefellers, owners of the UN and misanthrops of biblical proportions who have long advocated for drastic reduction of the world population. The article on BBC is given a benign twist, but the truth is out there for all who can read behind the lines (yes you always go about finding a cure for a disease by creating an even more deadly form of it). Believe the official story at your own peril.


    Here is it is in Rockefeller’s own words:

  30. Rene Levasseur says:

    If I may return to the original topic of the 12 000 US troops supposedly stationed in Malta. As a former military person, I find it very possible for this to happen in Malta. It is not difficult to post 12 000 troops for rapid deployment piecemeal and have them leave piecemeal. Whether it is true or not that there were 12 000 US troops here is another question. It is unfortunate that when Cynthia McKinney suggested this US military presence, many of us stood up to riducule here. We should have instead asked the government to be truthful. Being truthful may generate criticism, but it also gives transparency and creates a sense of stability. As a Maltese, I want my govenment to respect our neutrality and not to get involved in the wars of others. However, I would have also accepted the explanation that these troops are here temporarily and their function will be that of policing the Libyan seaboard and have all been deployed (a) for guard duty to ensure stability and protection of the everyday Libyan from roaming armed gangs in the streets, (b) that they will be policing the coast to stop illegal immigrants from Libya coming to Malta (c) they will permit Malta to continue its business relationships with Libyan bussinesses (d) they will allow Malta to drill for oil in its own waters, which could not be done before under the previous Libyan regime. I have learnt one major lesson in life “When you do not like something, ask yourself why?” Need I say more?

    • Lillian Smith says:

      Rene, thank you for your input.

      I agree with everything that you said and yes it is sad that people are prompt to ridicule without giving careful thought and examining every possibility.

      If troops are here to be deployed in Libya, the Maltese government is not going to come clean and tell its people the truth. You and I know that. And I am sorry to say that the list of possible explanations for having US troops in Malta, while commendable, is very far-fetched as the raison d’être is solely for Malta’s interest. Now why would the US government go to the trouble of sending troops to protect Maltese interests?

      Then maybe you are using sarcasm in your speculation of the possible reasons, which if this is the case, you have very cleverly made your point.

  31. Gei Gay says:

    No, I still believe this story is true.

  32. Rene Levasseur says:

    Lillian, I was not being sarcastic about my write-up. U.S. officials have always had an affinity for the Maltese, and this has been an advantage for us. I have worked in the U.S. and been involved with people in the U.S. government administration and know this. You will be pleased to find out how much these people actually know about us. Malta being neutral works to the advantage of both the western and eastern powers. It is a fine line we have to tow and it seems to be working. I was not surprised to read today that 12 000 U.S. troops landed in Libya right now. As I said in my previous entry, it is quite plausable these were in Malta, and it would have been magnificent if the government came forward and gave us all th.e good reasons why Malta was being served as a stopover for these troops while waiting for the right moment to be deployed. As a former soldier, I have experienced this. Hopefully, some good will come out of this American military intervention.

    • Rene, victory for imperialism anywhere means defeat for working people everywhere. This intervention is a war on the Libyan people, who have time and time again declared their support to their leader and their government — not the armed terrorist groups that the U.S. and NATO claim to be fighting in the global ‘war on terror.’ There simply are no good reasons for any entity to allow this to happen if they can stop it.

  33. Rene Levasseur says:

    I want to add to the above: the US deployment will keep the oil pumps running, and avoid an escalation in oil prices, which is also to Malta’s benefit. Especially since it will compensate for the U.S. and E.U. sanctions on Iran.
    And finally one last comment before I leave this blog. It is strange how Andreas Moser has not withdrawn his gurantee of no troops being in Malta (see the top of this page) after the evidence came out of the night time airlift 2 nights ago, and the announcement of the deployment today. Andreas, hopefully you have learnt from this: “When you do not like something, ask yourself why? before dismissing it.”

  34. Lillian Smith says:

    Rene, I do not want to burst your bubble. While I am very sure that the US intelligence knows a lot about Malta and has ‘an affinity’ as you put it, please rest assured this ‘affinity’ has nothing whatsoever to do with benefiting the Maltese, no more so then any ‘affinity’ shown for Iraqi’s or Afghanis – the capitalist imperialist system cares not one iota for the common man, be he American, Maltese, Libyan or whatever. What comes first and foremost is the almighty dollar. The military is used to clear the way for corporations (check out what Gen Smedley Butler said about his involvement in toppling governments in South America, for and on behalf of the United Fruit Company).

    I do not think that if the Malta government was in cahoots with the US military in hiding 12,000 troops in Malta (which now you say have landed in Libya), that this is something to be proud of, rather I think it is a betrayal of the Maltese Constitution and people.

    You also make the mistake of equating corporate wealth to mean wealth for the common men – that this wealth will somehow trickle down to the people in cheaper prices for oil and commodities. Unfortunately, the capitalist system does not work that way, it works by cornering all the resources and then once there is a monopoly, they will turn off and on the sluice valves in order to manipulate the markets for maximum benefit to the shareholders. That is the American and unfortunately now also the European way, where trans-national corporations run governments, all the while hiding behind the charade of democracy by presenting two or three candidates, all of whom are corporate shills, (or even own, or have major shares in corporations) which have been pre-chosen by the shadow government, and presented to the electorate to vote for, thus giving them the illusion of freedom of choice and democracy.

    As for Libya, all I know is that this country has now been destabilized and their is a great chance that it will go Islamist, the same that is very likely to happen with all the “Arab Spring” countries. Yet, the US and EU were very much in favour of this, despite knowing very well that with a change to Islamic Sharia, there was going to be less freedom and human rights (yes many of these countries would have been better off under their previous dictatorships, especially for minorities and women), just as long as it serves Western political and business interests. Let us not forget that it was the US who trained and armed the notorious Taliban, even though they knew that they hated women and treated them as ‘entities’ to be used, subjegated and killed at whim. Where do you see freedom and respect for Human Rights in this? Or do you agree that as long as the top 1% who rule the world are served, even at the expense of the remaing 99%, the end justifies the means?

  35. Mark says:

    I met some French sailors on shore leave last Thursday (in a Maltese pub). They were from a mine clearing vessel on the way to Libya.

  36. Rene Levasseur says:

    Lillian: A brief reply to your comments. We both know as history scholars that commerce and globalization and their stanglehold on the weak through military superiority has been practiced since the times of the Phoenicians. I am not saying that it is right or wrong, it simply is a situation we have. The capitalist system can be terrible, but it gives us our little luxuries, provides a high standard of living to the middle class to enjoy, and has added 20 years to our life span in the past century. We cannot have our cake and eat it. At this time there is no viable alternative. Hence, we either want to live our good way of life and accept our guilt feelings about the exploitation of others or have nothing to do with it and emigrate to a poor country (in Africa or Asia) where we can be deprived of essential items and live a shorter life, but have no guilt feelings about exploiting the weak.

    • Lillian Smith says:

      Rene, I disagree with you. The Phoenicians were never a military power, just a commercial one.

      Secondly, are you telling me that we do not have a viable alternative to the dog eat dog world of fundamentalist Capitalism? You have really given up on humanity then. For your information Rene, there are other economic models that would work to ease both human suffering and save the environment for future generations, but these are not allowed to be practiced and their proponents are censored and shunned. And how can any other systems be taught, when you have multi-national corporations with net worths of more than the GDP’s of whole nations and the political clout that this brings, funding both political parties and Universities, thus dictating global policy?

      And what makes you think that the average working schmuck in the West isn’t being exploited by the very same forces that you so are so keen to praise? Poverty and the working poor are found all over. How about the wage-slaves in North America that only earn minimum wage and need to work 80 hours per week or more just to pay the rent? Or the young people fresh from university (with a debt of $150,000 to pay, since tertiary education is not free) and the non-existent jobs that have practically eradicated the middle class completely? Or the newly-weds with a mortgage of $400,000 that they have to spend their whole lives to pay, mostly just the interest? Or perhaps the people driven to bankruptcy when they get sick, since there is no free health care or the 45 million Americans who cannot go to see a doctor because they do not have health insurance? Or the homeless people living in cars or in parks because they have lost their homes to the banks? Or the thousands of people who lost jobs and have to resort to charity-run ‘food banks’ for their daily food? Or the millions of Americans living below HALF the poverty line (6.7%) and the 15% living at the poverty line?

      Fundamentalist Capitalism is cannibalising its own children, the Middle Class produced after World War 11 in North America has very nearly been destroyed, producing a two-tier class system of the very rich and the working poor. This trend to claw back any gains made by the Middle Class started a few decades ago in North America and has now come to the shores of Europe, where the process will be repeated. Wait and see what will happen when all the legislation is re-written (why at this moment you have two soverign countries being run by bank technocrats, unelected) to favour the corporate elite, when Consumer Protection is diluted to non-existence, austerity measures introduced and pension suspended and retirement age removed and privatization of health and education become de rigueur. Add to that an never ending unchecked flood of immigrants to swell the labour market and keep wages low. Wait and tell me about your standard of living then.

      What you fail to understand is that “fundamentalist” Capitalism (that is Capitalism without any regulations) is an equal opportunity exploiter and that everyone is grist for the mill were corporate greed and power are concerned. That is you and me included.

  37. This was a great blog! Keep it up!

  38. Pingback: Qaddafi lies live on after him

  39. Pingback: When a blogger tries to deny conspiracy theories | A Recovered Meth Addict's Blog

  40. Person says:

    Seeing as everyone knows (sarcasm) that American troops are hiding on Malta, why can’t they specify where? Everyone keeps saying, “hurt well dey mus be in liek dede big undrgrawnd bunkrs, duh,” but knobs can PROVE IT. It would be exceptionally hard to move 12,000 American troops to a small island with noone seeing them.

  41. g says:

    After reading many of the comments “not all” I am suprised that they are all wrong and the troop are there !!! The reason nobody see them it because they are cloaked it a new tech that makes them invisible … I watched a show on t.v. that talked about cloaking , So quit looking for them and start trying to smell for them, There has to be alot of poop so even if you cant see them you should be able to smell the poop 12000 people pooping has a strong oder just like at a football game!


  42. Pingback: Who Kills all the Old People? | The Happy Hermit

  43. Hessenhenker says:

    Maybe she meant “Jalta”.
    Malta, Jalta, maybe Alta in Norway on the way to east to liberate Putin?

  44. Vitaly says:

    Seems history goes in rounds. Now in Donbass. One could accuse anybody of having troops anywhere. And no witnesses, no satellite shots, no OSCE stuff ain’t oppose the sheer strength of bare speculation.

    • Yes, it’s depressing. But even more so when you live in a little place where you know that it would be physically impossible for 12,000 troops with euqipment to hide.

    • Vitaly says:

      “I’ll bet our forces are dug in underground”. – Robert Sheckley))

Please leave your comments, questions, suggestions:

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s