Member Login Contact (800) 490-4495

NATO Killed Gaddafi to Stop Libyan Creation of Gold-Backed Currency

NATO Killed Gaddafi to Stop Libyan Creation of Gold-Backed Currency

One of the over 3,000 new Hillary Clinton emails released by the State Department on New Year’s Eve, contain damning evidence of Western nations using NATO as a tool to topple Libyan leader Muammar al-Gaddafi.  It was, as usual, the U.S. doing what the U.S. does best.  Portray a nation’s leader without a Rothschild established central bank as a “terrorist” and manipulate the masses into supporting US Military action in that country to “liberate the people.”  Their playbook has become far too obvious.

The NATO overthrow was not for the protection of the people, but instead it was to thwart Gaddafi’s attempt to create a gold-backed African currency to compete with the Western central banking monopoly. Libya, under Gaddafi, controlled its own oil.

The Foreign Policy Journal reports:

“The email identifies French President Nicholas Sarkozy as leading the attack on Libya with five specific purposes in mind: to obtain Libyan oil, ensure French influence in the region, increase Sarkozy’s reputation domestically, assert French military power, and to prevent Gaddafi’s influence in what is considered “Francophone Africa.”

“Most astounding is the lengthy section delineating the huge threat that Gaddafi’s gold and silver reserves, estimated at “143 tons of gold, and a similar amount in silver,” posed to the French franc (CFA) circulating as a prime African currency.”

According to the email:

“This gold was accumulated prior to the current rebellion and was intended to be used to establish a pan-African currency based on the Libyan golden Dinar. This plan was designed to provide the Francophone African Countries with an alternative to the French franc (CFA).

“(Source Comment: According to knowledgeable individuals this quantity of gold and silver is valued at more than $7 billion. French intelligence officers discovered this plan shortly after the current rebellion began, and this was one of the factors that influenced President Nicolas Sarkozy’s decision to commit France to the attack on Libya.)”

NATO Killed Gaddafi to Stop Libyan Creation of Gold-Backed Currency

Gaddafi’s government had its own wholly-owned central bank that issued loans to its people free of interest, as riba (usury) was not permitted in Libya. Muammar Gaddafi’s government gave everyone free healthcare and education. Libyans enjoyed a literacy rate of over eighty percent. Preceding the US-led attacks, there was little to no unemployment in Libya. Libya gained the highest gross domestic product in Africa, with less than five percent of its population classified as poor.

To solve the problem of lack of clean water in Libya nato,  Gaddafi, pulled off world’s largest infrastructure project, a man-made, underground river,  made from what is now known as Primary Water.

NATO Killed Gaddafi to Stop Libyan Creation of Gold-Backed Currency

The project provided clean drinking water to seventy percent of the Libyan people. It held the potential of turning vast wastelands into farmlands – that is, until US/NATO bombs destroyed its pumping stations, thus destroying the entire project.  Who are the terrorists again?  I think the American warmongering psychopaths need to change the definition of that word or they need a dictionary, or perhaps a mirror.

In 1991, at the gala opening of the Man-made River Project, the good Colonel Gaddafi spoke to the invited dignitaries and assembled crowd:

“After this achievement, American threats against Libya will double. The United States will make excuses [but] the real reason is to stop this achievement, to keep the people of Libya oppressed.”

The destruction of the once independent Libya should serve as a moral lesson, as well as the atrocities in Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Lebanon, and Palestine, where millions of people have been killed, injured, or made homeless in a  hotbed of radioactive waste.

All the while the Zionist media calls these barbarous crimes against humanity, “humanitarian interventions.”  Again, I think they need a dictionary.  Their definition of humanitarian clearly differs from those of us with a shred of human emotion and empathy.

So next time someone wants to badger you for NOT supporting the troops when they commit these horrible acts for the banking cartel, remind them of this.



Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>