Rebels claim to possess documents proving Gaddafi ordered forces to starve Misrata and attack until “blue sea turned red” with the blood of its inhabitants; media outlets parrot the claims unquestioned

By the Editor.

The ‘rebels said’ approach to journalism continues to spread with UK news outlets now picking up the next episode in the desperate attempt to bolster NATO’s illegitimate war. As is customary, zero evidence is provided and instead claims from spokespeople and members of the rebel movement are simply parroted unchallenged.

The UK Guardian tells of how the rebels claim to have “thousands” of incriminating documents in their possession:

Thousands of documents that reveal in chilling detail orders from Colonel Muammar Gaddafi’s senior generals to bombard and starve the people of Misrata have been gathered by war crimes investigators and are being kept at a secret location at the besieged Libyan port…

One document shows the commanding general of government forces instructing his units to starve Misrata’s population during the four-month siege. The order, from Youssef Ahmed Basheer Abu Hajar, states bluntly: “It is absolutely forbidden for supply cars, fuel and other services to enter the city of Misrata from all gates and checkpoints.”

Not only are we forced to believe these unevidenced claims from rebel spokespeople, but NATO is guilty of these very acts! NATO is actively starving Libyans with its airstrikes on Libya’s ports, infrastructure, and supply routes. Commercial as well as military ports have been bombed, drastically impeding the inflow of food and other essential goods. In a May 20 AP report Mohammed Rashid, general manager of Tripoli’s port talks about the NATO bombings of the port. He says only eight commercial ships had entered the port since the NATO airstrikes began on March 19, adding that the slowdown in shipping will reduce imports and make basic goods scarce and expensive:

“This is a continuation of the humanitarian blockade that began before two months,”

There are huge fuel shortages in Libya’s capital, as this video demonstrates. This parallel seemingly escapes the Guardian.

Although the report claims that the documents will form “damning” evidence in any future war crimes trial, the Guardian doesn’t print them. Nonetheless, its report continues by repeating more chatter from ‘investigators’ based in rebel-held Misrata.

Plans to bombard the city are also in the archive, say investigators, who also claim they have a message from Gaddafi relayed to the troops ordering that Misrata be obliterated and the “blue sea turned red” with the blood of the inhabitants.

To reiterate the previous point, NATO has been bombarding Tripoli’s 1.6 million inhabitants with increasing intensity for weeks already, and continues to do so. Civilian targets and structures have been hit killing over 800 according to government figures. This includes Gaddafi’s grandchildren as well as several innocents inside Libya’s Nasser University. But in light of this our media still chooses to focus on mere rumours from Libya’s al Qaeda-linked and NATO-backed rebels, rather than on evidenced atrocities committed by NATO.

Khalid Alwafi, a “Misrata war crimes investigator”, tells the Guardian:

“All the evidence is here. Signed and stamped.”

Yeah? Well, can we see it? Or is that too much to ask? You would think they’d be itching to get these documents public if indeed they were so “damning”.

This “war crimes investigator” is as cagey with his ‘evidence’ as CNN’s recent rebel source who claimed the existence of videos of Gaddafi loyalists raping women, but then said that his rebel commander destroyed them all! Really, you just couldn’t make this up.

The UK Independent is carrying the same story, but they can’t even seem to get the source’s name right. Their man goes by the name of “Khalid Alwab” instead. They repeat the “blue sea turned red” story as fact, again without going to the trouble of actually proving anything.

The rebels’ recent testimony has exhibited suspicious evasiveness and an almost comical lack of credibility. Should we really believe more of their claims without a single shred of evidence?