Manchester Bomber Was Product of West's Libya/Syria Intervention

[Origanalist]

written by daniel mcadams
wednesday may 24, 2017

http://ronpaulinstitute.org/archives...-intervention/



Here's what the media and politicians don't want you to know about the Manchester, UK, suicide attack: Salman Abedi, the 22 year old who killed nearly two dozen concert-goers in Manchester, UK, was the product of the US and UK overthrow of Gaddafi in Libya and "regime change" policy in Syria. He was a radicalized Libyan whose family fled Gaddafi's secular Libya, and later he trained to be an armed "rebel" in Syria, fighting for the US and UK "regime change" policy toward the secular Assad government.

The suicide attacker was the direct product of US and UK interventions in the greater Middle East.

According to the London Telegraph, Abedi, a son of Libyan immigrants living in a radicalized Muslim neighborhood in Manchester had returned to Libya several times after the overthrow of Muamar Gaddafi, most recently just weeks ago. After the US/UK and allied "liberation" of Libya, all manner of previously outlawed and fiercely suppressed radical jihadist groups suddenly found they had free rein to operate in Libya. This is the Libya that Abedi returned to and where he likely prepared for his suicide attack on pop concert attendees. Before the US-led attack on Libya in 2011, there was no al-Qaeda, ISIS, or any other related terrorist organization operating (at least with impunity) on Libyan soil.

Gaddafi himself warned Europe in January 2011 that if they overthrew his government the result would be radical Islamist attacks on Europe, but European governments paid no heed to the warnings. Post-Gaddafi Libya became an incubator of Islamist terrorists and terrorism, including prime recruiting ground for extremists to fight jihad in Syria against the also-secular Bashar Assad.

In Salman Abedi we have the convergence of both these disastrous US/UK and allied interventions, however: it turns out that not only did Abedi make trips to Libya to radicalize and train for terror, but he also travelled to Syria to become one of the "Syria rebels" fighting on the same side as the US and UK to overthrow the Assad government. Was he perhaps even trained in a CIA program? We don't know, but it certainly is possible.

While the mainstream media and opportunistic politicians will argue that the only solution is more western intervention in the Middle East, the plain truth is that at least partial responsibility for this attack lies at the feet of those who pushed and pursued western intervention in Libya and Syria.

There would have been no jihadist training camps in Libya had Gaddafi not been overthrown by the US/UK and allies. There would have been no explosion of ISIS or al-Qaeda in Syria had it not been for the US/UK and allied policy of "regime change" in that country.

When thinking about Abedi's guilt for this heinous act of murder, do not forget those interventionists who lit the fuse that started this conflagration. The guilt rests squarely on their shoulders as well.

http://ronpaulinstitute.org/archives...-intervention/

Copyright © 2017 by RonPaul Institute. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit and a live link are given.
Please donate to the Ron Paul Institute

[timosman]

This is crazy talk. Everybody knows blowback is not real.

[juleswin]

I would never understand why anyone who is sympathetic to ISIS would want to do an attack like this. One, if you support ISIS, attacking the US or England would cause the US to actually start attacking ISIS (if they weren't their clandestine sponsor) and secondly the west is on the same freaking side with ISIS and has been helping them grow over the years, do not bite the hand that feeds you albeit a somewhat abusive feeder.

If you support ISIS, for the love of God, move to Libya, Syria or Iraq and beat them on the battlefield. Don't attack the US or England, they would not back down from an attack on the homeland. If anything, they would double down on their effort.

[enhanced_deficit]

Is this connection confirmed?
Pre-Benghazi architect of Libya war/regime change did not mention anything like this or call for fixing Libya policy in his emotional tweet yesterday. He generally recommends strong corrective actions when kids are harmed.

https://twitter.com/BarackObama/stat...61620027076608



Related

Obama: Oh, by the way, we’re going to war in Libya


Obama Tears Up While Describing Newtown Victims During Speech on Gun Control Plan


Every time I think the about those kids, it gets me mad.
Barack Obama during his remarks about gun control Jan. 5, 2016, at the White House.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slate...ol_speech.html

[Dr.3D]

This is crazy talk. Everybody knows blowback is not real.

Yeah, besides, we can't let them dictate our foreign policy by doing terrorist acts.

/s

[jllundqu]

This common sense summary has no place in the administration's foreign policy. /sarc

[AZJoe]

[RonPaulMall]

I would never understand why anyone who is sympathetic to ISIS would want to do an attack like this. One, if you support ISIS, attacking the US or England would cause the US to actually start attacking ISIS (if they weren't their clandestine sponsor) and secondly the west is on the same freaking side with ISIS and has been helping them grow over the years, do not bite the hand that feeds you albeit a somewhat abusive feeder.

If you support ISIS, for the love of God, move to Libya, Syria or Iraq and beat them on the battlefield. Don't attack the US or England, they would not back down from an attack on the homeland. If anything, they would double down on their effort.

The Elites are on the side of ISIS, but the attacks are on the people. There isn't really any evidence to support your theory, either. The only thing the attacks are prompting Western Europe to double down on is its support of the migrant invasion. Why fight in Iraq or Syria when you can move to far better countries, rape and kill their citizens with impunity, and take their lands?

[Origanalist]

[goldenequity]

CROCODILE TEARS

Sorted' by MI5: How UK government sent British-Libyans (to join Al QAEDA) to fight Gaddafi
http://www.middleeasteye.net/news/so...afi-1219906488


A mural in Tripoli paying tribute to fighters from Manchester who joined the 17 February Martyrs' Brigade
during Libya's revolution hegemon overthrow and coup against Gaddafi (October 2011)

[Dr.3D]

[enhanced_deficit]

Corbyn is right: of course Manchester was linked to British foreign policy

Simon Jenkins We committed armed aggression against sovereign peoples who had not attacked us, claiming our motive was ‘to keep terror off the streets of Britain’

Friday 26 May 2017

Jeremy Corbyn is perfectly right to relate this week’s Manchester terrorist atrocity to British foreign policy in the Middle East. Whenever Tony Blair, Gordon Brown and David Cameron struggled to explain why British blood and finance had to go on toppling regimes in Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya, they were explicit: it was “to prevent terrorism in the streets of Britain”. The reason was given over and over again: to suppress militant Islam.
When that policy clearly leads to an increase in Islamist terrorism, we are entitled to agree with Corbyn that it has “simply failed”. Regimes were indeed toppled. Tens of thousands died, many of them civilians every bit as innocent as Manchester’s victims. Terrorism has not stopped.
Whenever al-Qaida or Isis seek to explain their atrocities, reference is usually made to British intervention and the military killing of innocent Muslims. It is mendacious to try to sanitise our overheated and jingoistic response to domestic terrorism by pretending that it is unrelated to British foreign policy. It was we who made the link, and before the terrorists did.

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...foreign-policy










Related

Corbyn links Manchester attack to foreign wars; blowback argument could make him next UK PM