"Libyan parliament approves new Cabinet" by Esam Mohamed  |  Associated Press, November 01, 2012

TRIPOLI, Libya — Libya’s Parliament on Wednesday approved the country’s new Cabinet in a vote of confidence, a spokesman said, but armed protesters cut the main road leading to the Parliament, vowing not to leave until members of the ousted regime of dictator Moammar Khadafy are excluded from political life.

Omar Humidan said five of the 27 ministers would be reconsidered after concerns were raised over their ties to the deposed regime.

That was not good enough for the protesters, who tried to storm the Parliament building but were turned back by security forces firing in the air. Then they camped outside the convention center that houses the Parliament sessions. The disruption was the second in as many days by protesters, some in pickup trucks mounted with machine guns and antiaircraft pieces.

‘‘The fruits of the revolution have been harvested by regime remnants,’’ said Younis Mohammed.

‘‘We want all members of the old regime to be isolated,’’ he added, referring to the National Integrity Agency tasked with filtering lists of officials from Khadafy’s regime. ‘‘It is not possible that those who fought on the fronts are now under control of the same people they were fighting against,’’ he said.

The Wednesday vote approving the Cabinet was 105 in favor, 9 against, and 18 abstentions, after Parliament’s main political blocs gave their support to the new prime minister, Ali Zidan.

--more--"

"Six soldiers killed in militant attack

TRIPOLI — Rooftop snipers and knife-wielding assailants killed six soldiers in Libya’s eastern city of Benghazi early Saturday, in the largest attack on the country’s new security forces to date, officials said. The brazen assault by hundreds of gunmen on security installations forced soldiers to withdraw from some of their bases. The attacks are believed to be retaliation for the expulsion of a major militia from the city last weekend. (AP)

"Libyan Army chief steps down after deadly clashes; Battles between Benghazi brigade, protesters kill 31" by Esam Mohamed |  Associated Press, June 10, 2013

TRIPOLI, Libya — One of Libya’s highest military officers resigned on Sunday after clashes between protesters and a government-aligned militia he was in charge of killed 31 people in the eastern city of Benghazi, the deadliest such violence in a country where armed factions hold sway.

The bloodshed underscored the growing public anger over the government’s failure to build an army capable of reining in the militias that dominate parts of the country nearly two years after the fall of Moammar Khadafy. The militias have become bolder in trying to shape Libya’s politics.

The violence erupted Saturday when protesters in Benghazi, the country’s second-largest city, stormed the main camp of Libya Shield, a largely Islamist grouping of militias that are paid by the government to help maintain security. The protesters were demanding that the militias submit to the full authority of Libya’s security forces or lay down their arms.

The clashes prompted Army Chief of Staff Major General Youssef al-Mangoush to resign, citing the unusually high death toll from the violence. Mangoush was due to be replaced soon, and the country’s Congress voted in support of accepting his resignation Sunday.

He was in charge of the country’s roughly 12 Libya Shield brigades, tasked with putting them on government payroll and directing them.

The brigades operate as a parallel security structure to the country’s police and armed forces. Libya Shield members are neither entirely under the authority of the state nor operating entirely separately.

Libya’s nascent police and military rely on the brigades to help with security of the country. The militias are rooted in the brigades of rebels who fought to oust Khadafy in the 2011 uprising against the longtime leader. They have since mushroomed in power and size as the government continues to struggle to build its security forces after the civil war.

Leading up to Saturday’s clashes, military officers had been protesting Mangoush, accusing him of corruption and of failing to exert authority over militias. Some militias were believed to have favored Mangoush remaining in his post, because he had been unable or possibly unwilling to replace them with a strong unified force.

The militias, many of them refusing to join the army until ministries are purged of former regime officials, are seen by some as exhibiting too much autonomy, according to Frederic Wehrey of the 6 Endowment for International Peace.

‘‘Local residents are upset from the sort-of parasitic nature of these militias,’’ said Wehrey. ‘‘I think some of these Shield forces were trying to help police the east but were leveraging their firepower to try and get concessions from the government.’’

Benghazi, the birthplace of the revolution that led to Khadafy’s capture and killing, was the site of the Sept. 11 assault last year on the US consulate that killed Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and three other Americans.

 I will be focusing on that 9/11 event later today.

--more--" 

 So how is freedom working out in Libya?

"A messy sort of freedom in post-Khadafy Libya" by Abigail Hauslohner  |  Washington Post, November 23, 2012

 Don Rumsfeld said it would be.

TRIPOLI, Libya — Tripoli has not witnessed the change that many had hoped it would see a year after Moammar Khadafy’s fall. Political progress has been downright sluggish. There are lots of weapons and little security. And people here are getting more and more anxious....

Radio Zone 100.7, despite all the doom and gloom, residents say it is just one indicator that postwar Tripoli is not actually as bad as it may appear.

 WaPo propaganda!

In fact, Tripoli is a spectacle of postrevolution paradoxes. It is a place where all of the successes and failures of the Arab Spring’s most thorough revolution go on stark display side by side; where one can brave a militia gun battle and shop for designer dresses in the space of an afternoon.

 In AmeriKa  they are looking to grab your gun; In Libya it's an adventure!

For all the weapons floating around, there is relatively little crime.

 Uh-oh

Libyans go to work and pick up groceries. Adults talk politics over cappuccinos. And teenagers chow down on burgers and blast pop music from their cars.

 Everything is great.

There is even Tripoland, an antiquated but popular little amusement park...

Beneath the surface, of course, it is all a mess, locals say. This is a capital city in a country without a functioning government....

By far the biggest change brought by the end of Khadafy’s rule is the freedom that Libyans are now enjoying....

Libyans are so free, in fact, that much of Tripoli’s current trouble stems from the frustration that follows when friends, neighbors, and resident militias do whatever they please.

 Unf***ingbelievable. 

 Freedom is FRUSTRATING!

But....

 Seeing that word so often in my newspaper is frustrating.

--more--"

 I'll bet it would all be better if Khadafy were gone:

"Law bars Khadafy-era leaders from government; Militias push change that may help Islamists" by Esam Mohamed |  Associated Press, May 06, 2013

TRIPOLI, Libya — Under pressure from armed militias, Libya’s Parliament passed a sweeping law on Sunday that bans anyone who served as a senior official under Moammar Khadafy during his 42-year-long rule from working in government.

The Political Isolation Law could lead to the dismissal of many current leaders, some of whom had defected to the rebel side during the country’s 2011 civil war or had been elected to office since Khadafy’s ouster and killing.

The move is also likely to further stall the country’s already rocky transition to democracy by ousting elected lawmakers.

It injects a new dose of uncertainty into Libyan politics during a still-fragile transition. Liberals say it will give a boost to Islamists, who performed poorly in recent elections compared with their counterparts in other Arab states, although Islamists said they could also be affected by the ban.

The law was partially driven by the unpopularity of Libya’s current crop of politicians among many of the still-powerful former rebels who toppled Khadafy, and others who say little has improved since. Backers of the law say it is necessary to complete the revolution.

But critics say that the law was passed at gunpoint, as militias have surrounded several government buildings in Tripoli for the past several days barring officials from work. Their vehicles mounted with rocket-propelled grenades kept watch on the street during the vote.

Most of the militias have roots in the rebel groups that fought Khadafy, but they have mushroomed in the two years since his fall. Many of the armed groups have been accused of rights abuses, but the government continues to rely on them to keep order in the absence of a strong police or military. Many militiamen say they mostly want jobs and steady pay.

 I can see why Libyans are mad.

The General National Congress, Libya’s elected Parliament, voted overwhelmingly in favor of the law. Out of 200 lawmakers, 169 attended the vote.

Deputy head of Parliament Juma Attiga, who oversaw the vote, told the TV station Libya Ahrar that militias had pressured Parliament to vote in favor of the law, but that he had planned to vote yes in any case. He may be affected since he served as head of a governmental rights group under Khadafy.

Prime Minister Ali Zidan could also be among those affected, though his position as a diplomat under Khadafy might not be considered a ‘‘senior’’ post. He defected in 1980 and was elected to Libya’s Parliament before being voted by Jibril’s bloc to head government.

Notably absent from the voting was the head of Congress, Mohammed al-Megarif, who may be ousted under the new law for having served as an ambassador under Khadafy.

Parliamentary spokesman Omar Humeidan said after a live broadcast of the vote that a committee will be formed to see how the new law will be implemented.

The committee will be made up of judges and rights activists already serving on an ‘‘integrity commission’’ that vetted ministers for Khadafy-era ties. That body will be dissolved.

The law highlights the government’s inability to rein in armed groups and exposes the many obstacles the North African nation faces in rebuilding its weak central government.

It comes at a time when Islamists are in a position of strength following the Arab Spring uprisings that saw Libya’s two neighbors — Tunisia and Egypt — oust longtime autocrats from power. As is the case in all three nations, Islamists and liberals are in a power tussle for control over the direction of their countries.

But unlike Egypt and Tunisia, liberals won big in Libya’s first free elections last year. Former rebel leader Mahmoud Jibril’s liberal bloc took nearly half of the seats allocated for party lists. The body has a significant numbers of independents allied with Islamist parties.

 So WTF happened?

Legislators said the law states that parliamentarians who lose their post will be replaced by either the next name on the party list or by the independent candidate who came in second in a district. This could benefit many Islamists, who trailed in the elections and came in second in many districts.

Lawmaker Tawfiq al-Shaybi, who is with Jibril’s bloc, told Libya Ahrar TV that the country’s Muslim Brotherhood party was pushing the law ‘‘in favor of themselves rather that in favor of what is best for the country.’’

 Which means Qatar is behind the push.

Brotherhood lawmaker Majda al-Falah denied that Islamists passed the law to target their opponents.

Several drafts of the bill were debated during the past several months, and it was not immediately clear how the final draft will be applied. Those who it does affect will be banned from government positions for 10 years.

Zeinab al-Targi, another member of Jibril’s coalition in Parliament, said the law essentially criminalizes people by excluding them from political life, even if they sided with the opposition that ousted Khadafy.

Some Libyan activists say the vote is undemocratic since it occurred under the threat of violence from militias.

--more--" 

 I'm sorry, but I'm bored with politics.

"Senior Libyan official assassinated, raising fears of postwar security" by Kareem Fahim  |  New York Times, November 22, 2012

CAIRO — A senior Libyan security official was assassinated outside his home in the eastern city of Benghazi, officials said Wednesday. His death was the latest in a series of mysterious killings that have raised fears about the country’s precarious postwar security.

The official, Faraj Mohammed al-Drissi, who had held the post of Benghazi’s security director for only a few weeks, was shot to death late Tuesday night as he was returning from work, according to Wanis al-Sharif, a local Interior Ministry official.

About 10 p.m., a car pulled up on Drissi’s street and three men got out and opened fire, Sharif said, adding that the motive was unknown.

The killing was the latest blow for Benghazi, which has staggered since armed men attacked US intelligence and diplomatic buildings in September, killing four Americans in an assault that upended the city’s fragile power structure. The attack led to a popular revolt against the militias that have held sway since the uprising against Moammar Khadafy last year, including hard-line Islamist groups, which have been criticized for being a law unto themselves.

Government officials loudly promised to assert the state’s control, while privately conceding that they were outgunned and incapable of fulfilling such a pledge. Militia leaders have rejected efforts by the government to rein them in, saying they would consider disbanding only if their leaders were given senior posts in the government.

--more--"

 So Libya has turned into the Wild Wild East, huh? How did that happen?

"US OK’d sending arms to Libya" by James Risen, Mark Mazzetti and Michael S. Schmidt  |  New York Times, December 06, 2012

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration secretly gave its blessing to arms shipments to Libyan rebels from Qatar last year, but US officials later grew alarmed as evidence grew that Qatar was turning some of the weapons over to Islamist militants, according to US officials and foreign diplomats.

 Related: Qatar to the Quick 

 And now it's the same thing in Syria.

No evidence has emerged linking the weapons provided by the Qataris during the uprising against Moammar Khadafy to the attack that killed four Americans at the US diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya, in September.

But in the months before, the Obama administration clearly was worried about the consequences of its hidden hand in helping arm Libyan militants, concerns that have not previously been reported. The weapons and money from Qatar strengthened militant groups in Libya, allowing them to become a destabilizing force since the fall of Khadafy.

 We call it liberation, dammit!

The experience in Libya has taken on new urgency as the administration considers whether to play a direct role in arming rebels in Syria.

 See: Today's Syrian Spin is Staggering 

 It is so bad I did not even bother reading today's, although I did read this. Made me proud I voted for him in the special election primary.

The Obama administration did not initially raise objections when Qatar began shipping arms to opposition groups in Syria, even if it did not offer encouragement, according to current and former administration officials.

 Of course they didn't! 

But they said the United States has growing concerns that, just as in Libya, the Qataris are equipping some of the wrong militants.

Little late now!

The United States, which had only small numbers of CIA officers on the ground in Libya during the tumult of the rebellion, provided little oversight of the arms shipments.

 We were told there were none, but....  

Within weeks of endorsing Qatar’s plan to send weapons there in spring 2011, the White House began receiving reports that they were going to Islamist militant groups.

They were ‘‘more anti-democratic, more hard-line, closer to an extreme version of Islam’’ than the main rebel alliance in Libya, said a former Defense Department official.

The Qatari assistance to fighters viewed as hostile by the United States demonstrates the Obama administration’s continuing struggles in dealing with the Arab Spring uprisings. Relying on surrogates allows the United States to keep its fingerprints off operations, but also means they may play out in ways that conflict with US interests. 

 Well, there is good "Al-CIA-Duh" and bad "Al-CIA-Duh."

During the frantic early months of the Libyan rebellion, various players motivated by politics or profit — including a US arms dealer who proposed weapons transfers in an e-mail exchange with a US emissary later killed in Benghazi — sought to aid those trying to oust Khadafy.

 That's at the bottom of all wars.

But after the White House decided to encourage Qatar — and on a smaller scale, the United Arab Emirates — to ship arms to the Libyans, President Obama complained in April 2011 to the emir of Qatar that his country was not coordinating its actions in Libya with the United States, the US officials said.

 We were told we we didn't just a few paragraphs above, but whatever.

“The president made the point to the emir that we needed transparency about what Qatar was doing in Libya,’’ said a former senior administration official who had been briefed on the matter.

About that same time, Mahmoud Jibril, then the prime minister of the Libyan transitional government, expressed frustration to administration officials that the United States was allowing Qatar to arm extremist groups opposed to the new leadership, according to several US officials. They, like nearly a dozen current and former White House, diplomatic, intelligence, military, and foreign officials, would speak only on the condition of anonymity for this article.

 Who leaked this?

The administration has never determined where all of the weapons, paid for by Qatar and the United Arab Emirates, went inside Libya, officials said.

 Or if they even stayed there.

US officials say that the United Arab Emirates first approached the Obama administration during the early months of the Libyan uprising, asking for permission to ship US-built weapons that the United States had supplied for the emirates’ use. The administration rejected that request but instead urged the emirates to ship weapons to Libya that could not be traced to the United States.

 That way you wouldn't know about it and this government could go on lying.

--more--"

 I'll bet that also made Libyans mad.