A “no-fly zone” is a bad idea

By Ted Belman

In February Sarah Palin recommended that the US institute a no-fly zone over Libya. Now she is supported by the Arab League and the UN. Doesn’t mean she was right.

On February 24, JINSA recommended that the US Flatten the Libyan Air Force

    Without the air force, Gaddafi loses a key tool against his people. By acting to protect the population, getting on the right side of the Libyan revolution and definitively punishing Gaddafi, the United States would demonstrate the limits of Western tolerance for reckless, maniacal, murdering dictators.

    The Libyan Air Force is made up of some French F-1 fighters; some Sukhois (old ones) and some old MiGs. There are some helicopter gunships that need to be smashed. It would be 20 minutes work for the U.S. Air Force or, better yet, for a combined NATO force.

Remember that the US had to keep the no-fly zone over Iraq for 15 years at great yearly cost. Who wants that for Libya. Just flatten the air force. Simple.

Then it answers the question, “Is it our responsibility?”

    Yes it is, because we (collectively NATO, but each NATO country in its own way) have been coddling this crazy man for the last eight years on the assumption that handing over his nuclear program in 2003 when he thought he was next on President Bush’s “hit list” meant he had miraculously reformed and joined the ranks of civilized rulers. We swept under the rug Gaddafi’s many crimes, especially his role in ordering the destruction of Pan Am 103 over Lockerbie in 1988. The British, in the scummiest way imaginable, helped arrange for the release of Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, the operative killer on “mercy grounds,” that also paved the way for lucrative contracts for British companies.

And concludes

    For the President to make a speech and consider an indictment in the International Criminal Court is itself criminal in the fact of the ongoing massacre of the Libyan people.

    Gaddafi is a murderer and he has now set out against his own people using weapons that have no place against civilians. We have the simple ability to stop him and we could get it done in a day.

How right it was and is.

Effectively flattening the airforce will result in a no-fly zone.

March 18, 2011 | 26 Comments »

Subscribe to Israpundit Daily Digest

Leave a Reply

26 Comments / 26 Comments

  1. Any one calling Gaddafi a friend, must be an idiot. We all know what and who he is. My problem is that his replacements when he is gone, and this is at least is certain, is worse than he is. Same goes for Egypt, Bahrain, Yemen, Tunis and the rest of this “popular” raisings all funded by Iran and Saudi-Arabia(?).

    When God create the world, all the nations came complaining: “How come you give the middle east all the wealth of the world? All the oil is there, and nothing for us?”
    God said, “Wait until you see whom I put there!”

    No fly zone Is not a good Idea, leaving Gaddafi alone is even worse. Leave them to kill each other? I hate to think that this might be a viable option, in Lybia, Iraq, and maybe later in Iran?

  2. What is clear is that the Libyan rebels are affiliated with the Moslem Brotherhood, the Islamic organization that fought against the Allies along with Hitler in WWII. Obama did not have the legal authority to attack Libya, and must be impeached, for only Congress can decide that the U.S. can initiate military actions.

  3. Yamit, how can you call Qhaddafi an “ally”? The man has publicly called for Israel to become a binational state called “Israeltine”. Really. Does he have diplomatic relations with Israel?

    Pretty desperate, calling someone like that a “friend”

    Where did I call him either an ally or friend?

    Read again what I posted. Then ask yourself who is opposing Gaddafi? Who are those with the most vested interests to see him deposed? Ask yourself why Gadaffi and not Bahrain or Yemen? Why not Iran and many other countries run by autocrats and dictators? The genocides and mass murders on the African continent got a lot of lip service but almost no interventionare moves at regime change by America or the Western nations.

    I stated that Gaddafi for the past 20 years has been rather benign as a dictator and I have said he has been quite large in wealth distribution to his own peoples, opposed to Iran and other oil producing nations. He is unstable but as a leader quite stable and with him you know what you got. There are much worse than Gaddafi, so why Gaddafi and not those who are worse? If America had a small armed insurrection would she do other than Gddafi? I think probably worse. I’ve seen in my lifetime the brutality of American law enforcement.

    Israel gets nothing from propping up Jordan and nothing from that so called Peace agreement, Egypt is a given in the negative so why not Gaddafi? he is the one leader who all the other Arab and Muslim leaders universally hate. That makes him a potential ally of sorts and it need not be open or formalized. He may have attacked Americans and Western interests in the past but not Jews and not Israel. Besides he’s half Jewish by birth. That could be why the Arabs hate him o much? 🙂

    I stand by what I have posted and if by any chance he survives the Twin Towers could be child’s play in comparison to what he can do.

  4. Yamit, how can you call Qhaddafi an “ally”? The man has publicly called for Israel to become a binational state called “Israeltine”. Really. Does he have diplomatic relations with Israel?

    Pretty desperate, calling someone like that a “friend”.

    All the same, I know full well that whoever replaces him will be no better.

    Sanctions, boycotts against him for his atrocities might have made sense. Military action? As someone else above asked, then why not Iran?

    Only other times we intervened for “humanitarian reasons” that I can think of was in the case of Serbia (on behalf of Moslems), and Lebanon – AGAINST ISRAEL (though not in a direct military sense here) – and again on behalf of the thugs of the PLO (Moslems again), and then there was Somalia (Moslems again). There have been all manner of far worse atrocities – Tibet, Rwanda, Cambodia – and we do nothing at all.

    I’ve reached the point now where if one group of jihadists is attacking another, I say best to leave them alone so they can weaken each other, unless one side is openly threatening us in some way.

    I also am not TOO worried about parallels of this type of operation as regards Israel. I don’t think any Western military is anxious to tangle with the IDF.



    U.S., Britain fire over 100 cruise missiles at Libya targets

    Israel strikes Gaza after massive mortar barrage on south

    Syria mourners call for revolution as security forces fire tear gas

    Israel lodges formal complaint with UN over barrage of Gaza mortars

    Egypt crowd attacks reformist ElBaradei during first post-Mubarak elections

    Settlement attack could trigger terrorism by Jewish extremists

  6. I’m disgusted by the hypocrisy of the French. Why do they get to be involved in a war with a country of no threat to it but condemned America for going to war with Iraq and consistently condemn Israel for using military force against terrorists directly threatening her?

  7. There’s quite a lot to say about these comments. Firstly, the real story of Pan Am 103 is not emerging, and very strenuous efforts are being made to suppress it.

    The best way of dealing with Lockerbie, or any complicated story, is to ask for motive. The one that stands out in that plane crash is that Iran was angry beyond belief at the shooting down of its nice new Airbus IR655 by the Vincennes, which I proved last year was deliberate and not an accident. The reason was to kill one man a Mr Ahmad Beladi Behbehani, who happened to be head of the Iranian end of Iran-contra, which VP Bush who was in effect in charge of US policy at the time wanted to shut down. That prim and prissy New Englander had no time for the fun and games of the Reagan White Huse, and having dealt with I-C largely by Congress in the US, the write of that august body not running to Iran, decided to get rind of its main Iranian agent by more explosive means. If you think that the CIA could not contemplate blowing up an aircraft full of people to kill one, you have no idea of the immoral depths of their villany.

    But the CIA had been fed duff information and Behbehani was not on the flight. And 254 Iranians were killed. Remember than number. In deep cool secret US think tanks that hot Washington summer and in Langley the wonks came to the conclusion that the Iranians would demand blood, and they did. Through four long rounds of negotiations in Glion Switzerland in a four star hotel, Iranian and US representatives negotiated on what would be the fate of Pan Am 103, though the extent to which that technical detail was discussed is not yet obvious.

    The Iranians demanded 254 countable lives on an American aircraft, for the 254 lost on Pan Am 103. To them only Iranaians and other Muslims or even Shia Muslims did not count. They did not care about the aircraft and Pan Am 103 was a 20 year old war-horse that had been through a major refit and even renaming. They did not care much about compensation and the relatives received the bare minimum under the Warsaw agreements.

    But they did care who did the killing. Iranian traditional law is quite specific on his point. It had to be the work of a kinsman of someone who had died on IR655. The three-year old Leila Behbehani was clearly a kinsman of ABB – here name is that on a town in Western Iran near the Kuwait border and translates as “Evening Good Tents”, reflecting the replacement of a tented community by brick houses sometime in the remote past. Traditional Iranian revenge justice, which is called qesas and derives from the Hammurabi code, some 2600 years old, and rather older than the US Constitution makes no demands on the source of the revenge – a man may kill the killer of his brother with a knife owned by that killer. It is intentionality not ownership that matters. So the CIA may have given ABB a bomb, designed to resemble a PFLP GC device, for I think the original cover up was to attribute Lockerbie to the PFLP GC, but to keep Syria on side during the First Gulf War actions implicating the PFLP GC had to be abandoned.

    That led to a problem, and the actual Lockerbie bomb was a imitation PFLP GC device which the US could use to get Iran off the hook. I am sure the deal reached in Glion inclded a clause that Iran must never be impicated in any way.

    I am also certain that Heathrow was chosen and the CIA intended the device to be demonstarted to have been loaded there. That would imply Iran, as the Iran Air facilities were adjacent to those of Pan Am. But the specific rationale of the break-in that Manly discovered was that there had been a break-in to the terminal and not a break-out. If Iran Air facilities had been used, there would have been no need for a break-in at all presumably. Because there was a break-in the CIA was demonstrating to the world that Iran was not involved. This was immaterial to the Iranians who only wanted their measured revenge and no blame, but essential to the American position.

    The PFLP GC ruse was of course not ideal as it needed the suggestion that a Sunni based group would work for a Shia government. But the consumers of the plot were not to be the Arab Street or news media. It was to be the US press, which has a dim understanding of rivalries in the Muslim religion and a almost racist inability to see differences in different positions. So the idea that a Sunni group could be bought by a Shia government might work on Fox or the WSJ, but not in the real world.

    I can extend this story at very great length, if you wish.

  8. Finally some common sense on Libya. Conventional neocons like David Horowitz are beating the drums for a war. That makes no sense. It seems positively Jewicidal.

  9. It is not in our interest to be involved in a Libyan civil war. As I said, we should be grateful any time muslims are going at each other. Now Iran is a country which it would be in our interest to strike at militarily, due to its direct threat against us as well as its development of nuclear weapons. Not to mention that Iranians are at least fighting for genuine freedom as opposed to the muslim brotherhood jihadists fighting gadaffi. Yet NATO has no intention of using military force against Iran. The west has strange priorties to say the least.

  10. Removing the Libyan dictator would be a grave error for the West. Two decades have passed since Libya last engaged in terrorism, and even then its involvement was cautious, usually though Palestinian terrorists. Gaddhaffi is so sensible that he dismantled Libya’s advanced nuclear program immediately after the United States attacked Iraq, realizing that he might be the next in line.

    Despite his rhetoric, Gaddhaffi silently cooperates with the West against Iran and terrorism. He may not be the nicest guy to deal with, but he is the best available choice for a Libyan ruler.

    The US plan for an air blockade of Libya, ostensibly to prevent Gaddhaffi from attacking rebel towns, may backfire as the autocrat would be forced to bring ground troops into urban combat, which would be far bloodier. Splitting Libya into several states—another American plan—would be harshly opposed by the Arab street, which would rightly view that as a US attempt to divide and conquer Muslim oil wealth. Removing Gaddhaffi might not lead to civil war, but it would certainly cause destabilizing border conflicts between Bedouin tribes.

    The Western image of a popular uprising in Libya is mistaken. Libyans are generally very supportive of Gaddhaffi, who uniquely among Muslim rulers distributed much of the country’s oil profits to his people, making them one of the richest nations on earth. This can be seen from the soldiers’ loyalty to his regime.

    As usual, Israel is missing a great chance for a strong alliance. Right now, we should be lobbying in Washington on Gaddhaffi’s behalf. He is a highly independent ruler who can afford to break away from the Arab mainstream and establish ties with Israel.

    Russia remains implicitly supportive of Gaddhaffi because of its arms deal with Libya. Likewise, Israel could shift the geopolitical balance in her favor by procuring weapons from Russia instead of the United States.

  11. Dear fellow Jews, our problems are not the Arab regimes around us, nor the UN, nor the UE, nor Obama.

    Look inward.

    Purim is upon us. Learn the lesson.

    Shabbat Shalom.

  12. To think that democracy is what will come out of any of this is naive also. Not that democracy is the answer to all ills.

  13. Felix is right to call me out on this. I come down on the side of stability not “democracy”. Mubarak and Gadhaffi were not attacking us. They represent stability for us. That is not to say that Mubarak was our friend. He allowed smuggling into Gaza and he pushed for us to get rid of our atomic stockpile. Similarly it is in the interest of Israel that Saudi Arabia and Barain are not toppled by Iran.

    The point I was making in this post was academic. Better to flatten the airforce than to monitor it. Bjut I begged the question of whether it is in our interest to undermine Qadaffi.

  14. You’re the ass – You have a mouth but no ears. You don’t even know what I’m telling you you’re not a prophet about – you’re too busy spouting off to listen to anyone. You assume the Jewish people are going to support the no fly zone and subsequent war that will follow, you don’t know this and you are not a prophet.

    You think we don’t see this coming? We know its coming – we also know that a slapdown of “Biblical proportions” will follow for those that attempt to wrest control or Jerusalem from us.

    Stop assuming you’re the only one in the world that know whats going on.

  15. Felix – you’re no prophet, stop trying


    What a total ass you are!

    Are you Jewish?

    I would as an Irishman be ashamed of any Irish person to make such a stupid remark. You are a total idiot.

    I am opposed to allideas of magic, inconsistency, conspriracy theorizing etc

    I predicted that the US Empire would strike Gadaffi because of thhe inherent weakness of Obama and his alliance with Sharia (The Empire/Sharia Alliance) which relies on false Jews like JINSA to prop him up.

    They want to dictate everything that happens in the world, especially the Middle East, especially Jerusalem

    So the method that they use (note not just Obama but Reagan, Clinton, Bush as well)

    They wade in on the basis of a Media blanket campaign where they think they can win

    Then on the basis of that they move on to the next victim

    Which is what the trial of Milosevic was all about.

    This if you follow me is the extreme danger that Israel is in because of Libya

  16. I find it disconcerting how everyone is assuming these “rebels” or “freedom fighters” are going to be an improvement over Qadoofy

    Why did you write “Qadoofy”?

  17. Dear Felix,

    I find it disconcerting how everyone is assuming these “rebels” or “freedom fighters” are going to be an improvement over Qadoofy.

  18. This guy Hayes was central in pinning the blame of Lockerbie on Libya. If Jews are serious about being a light to the nations then they shoud expose the Brits as a pack of liars

    And the Brits and Sarcozy were fronting for Obama on this UN Resolution

    There is also a Canadian connection here


    Based on the forensic Dr. Hayes had supplied, an entire family [The Maguire seven] was sent to jail in 1976. They were acquitted in 1992. Sir john May was appointed to review Dr. Hayes forensic evidence.

    “The whole scientific basis on which the prosecution in [the trial of the alleged IRA Maguire Seven] was founded was in truth so vitiated that on this basis alone, the Court of Appeal should be invited to set aside the conviction,” concluded Sir john May.

    The Maguire Seven shared a house. On Dec. 3 1973, their house was raided by police. Two of the so called Guildford Four had alledged that explosives were kept at that house.

    Scientific tests did not reveal any explosives residue in the house. However, swabs were taken from their hands as well as the rubber gloves belonging to Mrs. Maguire to test for explosives residue.

    The RARDE scientists conducted thin layer chromatography tests and reported positive results for nitroglycerine for all male appellants but one, and positive results for Mrs. Maguire’s rubber gloves.

    The issues in the appeal were: (a) was the substance nitroglycerine? And (b) if it was, could there be an innocent explanation as for example a contamination from an indirect source?

    The judgment of the Court of Appeal included findings that:

    1. Rarde scientists failed to disclose an explosive residue test conducted on 10.12.74.

    2. Rarde scientists failed to disclose a negative “nail scrape” test conducted by a laboratory assistant on 11.2.76.

    3. A Rarde scientist lied when he told the Crown Prosecutor (who passed the information on to the defence) that the scientists could distinguish between test results for nitroglycerine (the substance charged in the indictment) and another form of explosives known as PETN.

    4. There had been mishandling by the judge of evidence found by the defence team late in the trial that the RARDE test was not exclusive for nitroglycerine.

    5. It was revealed that tests conducted in 1977 (the same year as the Maguire Seven’s first, unsuccessful, appeal to the Court of Appeal) by Rarde scientists, and published in 1982 showed that it was not necessary to “knead” explosives (as had been said in the trial) to get traces of nitroglycerine under the fingernails.

    6. Finally, it was established from fresh evidence brought out in the May inquiry that nitroglycerine traces could be innocently acquired by persons using a hand towel after one person with nitroglycerine on their hands had wiped their hands on the towel. The possibility of innocent contamination could not be excluded.

    All served their full sentence, from 4 to 14 years, before being declared innocent in 1990.


    Early Retirement

    At the young age of 43, Hayes resigned just a few months after the discovery of the timer fragment to begin a new life as a chiropodist. There can be little doubt as to why he decided to embark into such new career as defence QC Richard Keen suggested at the Lockerbie trial.

    “KEEN. Dr Hayes, you told us in your earlier evidence that you were head of the Forensics explosives laboratory at RARDE until 1989? And your change of career from forensic scientist to chiropodist would appear to coincide in point of time with the decision of the Home Secretary to appoint Sir John May to inquire into the trial of those known as the Maguire Seven. Is that true?
    ?HAYES. I believe so. I don’t recall clearly.”
    ?“I am convinced to this day that Hayes really did recall the date and reason. He simply did not dare say it in front of the judges. For in May 1989, even as he examined the fragment which appeared in the evidence bag with a label signed by Detective Constable Gilchrist and altered by unknown persons, a campaign was running in Parliament to have him and his colleagues investigated for their roles in both IRA trials. The Parliamentary findings were published in 1992 and 1996, long after the November 1991 indictments of the Libyan suspects Al-Megrahi and Fhimah,” wrote Dr Swire in his forthcoming book.


    In the Megrahi’s case, Dr Hayes did not even perform the basic test which would have established, or not, the presence of explosive residue on the sample. During the trial, he maintained that the fragment was too small while it is factually established that his laboratory has performed such test on smaller samples.

    Had he performed such test, no residue would have been found. As noted by MeBo engineer U. Lumpert, the fragment shown at the Zeist trial belongs to a timer that was never connected to a relay. In other words, that timer never triggered a bomb.



  19. I always was given to believe that the Jewish people were to be a light unto the nations. Then how about these supposed Zionists as Israpundit claims to be start giving the truth especially to the American people among othhers of course

    There is much doubt about Libya and Lockerbie. Did Gadaffi pay up as a bribe to the Empire/Sharia Alliance in order to leave Libya alone?

    This man Jim Squires was seriously effected by Lockerbie and is no fool:

    The Pan Am 103 Trial in 2001 of Al-Megrahi,
    his conviction and August 2009 release on compassionate grounds

    26th February 2011
    British officials “warning Gaddafi regime of ICC arrest warrants for war crimes.”
    The Guardian newspaper today reports that “British officials are contacting senior Libyan regime figures to persuade them to desert Gaddafi or face trial for war crimes and crimes against humanity”. Two senior figures have not only defected, they claim that Gaddafi personally ordered the Lockerbie bombing. Unfortunately for those who have swallowed the latest news coverage of statements by former ministers Abd-al-Jalil and General Younes, the world’s media has ignored their motivation. It is the fundamental urge for self-preservation. These two gentlemen have made claims which are music to the ears of the British and American governments. A reasonable view of their statements is that they are seeking to plea bargain with the International Criminal Court in advance of any arrests. They provide no proof, and when probed by journalists have turned reticent and evasive. We look forward with interest to any details which might indicate “proof”. So far, nothing has emerged.

    The two key elements of the conviction of al-Megrahi are:
    1. The identification of Al-Megrahi: In an extraordinary development in 2005, Maltese shopkeeper Toni Gauci was exposed as an unreliable witness by the man who in 1991 indicted Megrahi, former Scottish Lord Advocate Peter Fraser. In Fraser’s words, Gauci was “an apple short of a picnic.” And yet the judges trusted Gauci’s contradictory and confused evidence, and ignored the fact that Gauci was on a promise of a multi-million dollar reward if Al-Megrahi was convicted. It is now documented and proved that Gauci was paid at least $2 million for his evidence, and his brother Paul $1 million.
    2. A fragment of a printed circuit board: Found by Dr Thomas Hayes, its label had been altered by unknown persons’ and the entry concerning that finding in Hayes’ notebook remains to this day highly suspicious.
    Now more than ever it is imperative that an independent inquiry take place into the undisclosed evidence and its effect upon the course of the trial. By a tragic coincidence, the 1989 Sir John May inquiry into the Maguire family trial (see below – Dr Thomas Hayes) provides an exact template.

    The background
    Terrorists who bombed Pan Am 103 over Lockerbie on 21st December 1988 murdered 270 passengers, crew, and townsfolk of a quiet Scottish town. Among the dead was Flora Swire, aged 24. Two Libyan agents – Abdel Bassett Al-Megrahi and Khalifah Fhimah – were targeted by the CIA and FBI as the guilty men. In a trial held in Holland Fhimah was released with “No Case to Answer”. Al-Megrahi was convicted. Much of the world believed that that was where the story ended. Only after twenty years campaigning by Jim Swire, Professor Bob Black and many others did the sensational truth begin to emerge.


  20. You can count on it happening at some point – Thats when they get to find out how hard it is to fight Hashem.

  21. At last somebody on the Jewish side comes out with the truth. THANK YOU HCQ. For a correct orientation HCQ turn to the past articles on http://www.wedefendisrael.com

    And particularly to the article written yesterday which anticipates precisely that the Empire/Sharia Alliance cannot allow Gadaffi to stand

    It is such a shame that Belman joins the Empire/Sharia Alliance

    For sheer assholery the above post and the contradictory comment takes some beating

    we are vulnerable to them doing it to us.

    Hardly a position of principle towards Libya and national self determination but if you think even that why do you Belman ally yourself with these Empire Sharia Alliance Imperialists JINSA



    because the sickness is not just Belman and Israpundit but goes right across the board among these so called Zionist and so called pro Israel people

  22. I too have been thinking of that parallel. Whether or not the UN sanctioned it in Libya as they did in Serbia, we are vulnerable to them doing it to us. The UN just needs a pretext for action and the absence of a US veto.

  23. And what if a UN authorized NATO is used against Israel someday? If you support the interference of the globalist cabal of muckrakers against your enemies then do not complain when those same internationalists eventually decide to use force of arms against Israel should she refuse to bow to international pressure to feed more of herself to the wolves. Should Israel refuse to cede J’Salem to either the muzzies or to UN control, what’s to stop these purveyors of the NWO from beating down Israel’s door? The elitists, for years, have been working to set Israel up as an abuser of “Palestinian” human(And judging by their actions in Itamar, their humanity is certainly debateable)rights.

    Just thought I would throw that out there.