Here’s What The Media Doesn’t Want You To Know About The Manchester Attack

(RPI) 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.

We're revolutionizing the news industry, but we need your help! Click here to get started.

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.

By Daniel McAdams / Republished with permission / RPI / Report a typo




You must be logged in to post a comment.

  • julie

    we are way past the blame game stage with this, as UK citizens a stand needs to be made by the UK, we dont have a magic wand to wave that will correct all past wrong doing on whatever side, but the time has come to make a stand and defend UK borders

  • Ilena Falk

    I’ve been reading a book by F William Engdahl called “The Lost Hegemon, Whom the Gods Would Destroy”. Since the time that the USA funded and trained the Mujahideen (w/Osama bin Laden) to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan, the “strategy” has been also replicated in the Balkans, the Caucasus, across Central Asia, Iraq, Egypt, Libya, and Syria. They were so successful in the 80s with arming and training “radicalized” Muslims, that the game was continued. I don’t know if it was supposed to be used like it is presently, but at least since 9/11, the USA (and allies) have been destabilizing entire regions by using “radicalized Muslims”.

    What has happened is one of the most Evil things. Basically, weaponizing one group of humans to terrorize other groups and vice versa.

  • Kostas Misaris

    I agree though I feel is much more obscure the situation, the interventions of the west surely they are not for free people from the tyrrans, this escuse is just lor laighs. An exmple: do they care for what the people of Saudia living? Do they care for the Palestinians? Do they care even for their people? NO!!!

  • Karen Benjamin

    In response to Anti-media’s op ed “What the media doesn’t want you to know about the Manchester attack” I am taken back by the nativity and simplemindedness of the entire article. Your statement that Al Qaeda didn’t exist before the US attack in 2011 is deceptive at best. Al Qaeda was formed in Pakistan in 1988 by O. Bin Laden, Dr. Fadl and Zawahiri and their support has since spread across the ME and Africa for the next 22 years until that US led attack. But hey, anyone can make a simple mistake.

    Then there is your main argument that Western intervention in the region is responsible for all things evil; you use nothing more than antidotes and assumptions to build your house upon. The charge that Western intervention is the root cause of the conflagration of the Middle East’s troubles, fails to take into consideration the role of two different interpretations of Islam. Their fourteen hundred year war continues to this day and is, in part responsible for much blood shed.

    Nor does it take into consideration the role of rich tyrants who run the various Islamic countries in the GCC have on terrorism. Iran, KSA, Yeman, Qatar, Bahrain, Kuwait, Lebanon, Syria, Libya, Egypt, Pakistan, and Iraq all have long histories of tyrannical Kings and despots. Their combined brutality has subjugated and enslaved millions of their own people into poverty and illiteracy. This has led to tremendous violence across the globe.

    Nor does your argument take into account the fact that the majority of Islamic countries have poor and or non-existent education systems. This simple and much overlooked fact had allowed for local Muslim Imans to fill this gap with religious education training that is often highly biased against the West, as well as highly radicalized.

    As a Westerner, I have no problems taking ownership of my failings. But to place the weight of the twenty-two deaths at the hands of a radicalized Muslim in Manchester on the West ignores the facts and many causes of the problem.

    Show 5 Replies
    • Toto

      You want to come across as an “intellectual” and you don’t even know how to read.

      The article DOES NOT say Al Quaeda did not exist before 2011. It says it did not “operate” IN LYBYA before 2011″ here—> this is what it says: (“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.)

      Also, it is not “nativity” (as in birth) as you wrote, it is “naiveté” which apparently is what you suffer from along with oligophrenia.

      I won’t even bother with the rest of your “simpleminded” comment…

      You tried to ridicule the article, instead you ridiculed yourself. How small do you feel now?

      • Karen Benjamin

        Sorry toto, but your not in Kansas any longer. And yes, there were several Al Qaeda like groups in Libya long before the US attack. Let’s start with the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group founded in about 1995. Their goal was to establish an Islamic State, and by the way they joined Al Qaeda in 2007. Long before the 2011 led attack on that country. As for my typos, thank you for pointing them out. But logic and truth are still logic and truth, regardless of how rough their edge. I know it is easy to attack all things Western as I pointed out. Is there any self incrimination of all things Islam that you would like to confess to?

        • Toto

          To Karin Benjamin,

          It is amusing to almost always see the average US citizen resort to Hollywood, movies and TV. It is the Bible and encyclopedia of the uneducated. Of course I am referring to your Toto and Kansas remark. If you think mocking a name tilts reasoning towards you, then my assessment of your intelligence in my previous comment stands. Additionally, since you are calling me a dog, (and I am male), your are licensing me to retort in the same fashion. Now, since your name indicates you are woman, I guess I could call you a female dog… but I won’t…

          Typo? No, it was not a typo. Typo is what I committed when I typed “Lybya” instead of “Libya”. The “i” is two keys from the “y”, and I hit the wrong one. That is a typo! In your case, it was ignorance. Obviously you meant naiveté, just that you did not know how to spell it. So you wrote nativity. Of course, if you knew the meaning of nativity, you would not have used in lieu of naiveté. Also, to highlight your mastery of the language, I will point now (since I forgave you previously) it is not “antidote”, it is “anecdote”… and don’t tell me it is a typo. It is intellectual scarcity which leads to your platitudinous and desultory rambling. But then again, who cares?… right? Apparently, in “your book” anything goes… never mind truth, exactness, logic and factual history. Much less what an article “really” says or is trying to convey or establish. What is important is what “you understand’ , proceed from a mistaken position, (then never admit it).. and unload a cacophony of unrelated and nugatorious presuppositions.

          What you have done is engage is sophism. Your argument appears to be truthful and logical, but in reality it is not. First, you failed to understand the article. Then proceeded to attack it based on your misconstruing of it. You took off with a defense of the West when what the article said is absolutely true.

          Now, if the Muslims have their own turmoils, corrupt regimes and backward social societies, that does not invalidate nor negate the fact that the West has meddled in their affairs and have engaged in regime change, bombing and decimation of cities and countries. Example: Iraq has been destroyed. And what did Iraq do? Oh yeah!… Saddam wanted to sell his oil outside of the petro-dollar!… hmmm? Not to mention that according to General Wesley Clark it was part of a plan to destabilize the Middle East by attacking other countries, which turned out to be true.

          You mentioned Osama bin Laden. Who trained him? Who armed him? Who has destabilized the region? Who arms and supports al Quaeda/al Nusra/Isis?

          And how about those Arab despots? And trust me you are correct on that, they are corrupt despots, but they (Saddam Hussein, Khadafi) kept the stability of their countries. It was after the toppling of Saddam and Khadafi that the content of Pandora’s box has really been unleashed.

          You allude to lack of education and rampant poverty. If that was the cause, why do we not see Hondurans blowing themselves up all over the world in acts of terrorism? Or Haitians? Ethiopians? etc, etc. It is not poverty and lack of education as you say. It is people with a strong fighting spirit who have responded to external meddling and abuse. The same way George Washington and the founding fathers rightfully rebelled against the exploitation and mistreatment of Great Britain. But they were called heroes. What you fail to see is the clarity of humanity and the unfairness of evil. When you do something it is brave. When others do it is terrorism.

          What is the result when a suicide bomber takes the lives of others and when a B-2 bombs a village out of existence? What? One is a terrorist and the other is brave? If a suicide bomber kills people they are called innocent victims. In the case of a B-2 it’s residual damage. Both are evil and despicable acts. You see, humans are such that when you hurt them or kill their loved one, they get back at you. Ever heard of pay back? Revenge? Retaliation?

          Now, I can’t recall the last time an Arab/Muslim country overthrew a western government. However, I do recall many times when the US intervened, attacked or engaged in regime change in other countries. Never mind Britain, France etc..

          Below I will mention a list that maybe Hollywood or Wolf Blitzer of the other Lilliputians in the media will not inform you of. These are interventions, regime changes and attacks the US carried out on other countries/territories.

          1846 Mexico War, 1887 Samoa, 1893 Hawaii, 1898 Cuba and Puerto Rico, 1899 Philippines, 1900 China, 1903 Panama, 1903 Honduras, 1912 Nicaragua, 1914 Mexico, 1915 Haiti, 1916 Dominican Republic, 1918 Russia, 1941 Panama, 1945-50 Korea, 1949 Syrian coup d’état, 1953 Iranian coup d’état, 1954 Guatemala, 1958 Lebanon Crisis, 1961 Cuba (Bay of Pigs Invasion), 1960 Operation Mongoose, 1965 Dominican Republic, 1973 Chilean coup d’état, 1979-1989 Afghanistan, 1982-89 Destabilizing Nicaragua, 1983 Grenada, 1989 Grenada, 1989 Panama, 1991 Haiti, 1991-2003 Iraq, 2005 Iran, 2011 Libya, 2005 to the present Syria

          Enough? Still want to defend “the poor” West? And for the record, I am not Muslim, do not sympathize with them nor am I from that part of the world. I am not defending them like you are defending “the West”. For you see, whenever you start defending governments you get yourself in a dilemma. You stepped into quicksand and it is difficult to get out. The only way is to say that you were and are WRONG. But I don’t see you doing that because your arrogance has already manifested itself when instead of admitting that you misread the article, you opted to doubled down saying ” But logic and truth are still logic and truth, regardless of how rough their edge.” The problem is your argument, like all sophisms, lacked logic and truth.

          I stand with the American people, who are decent, forward, respectful and honest. But just because I am an American, does not translate into automatic approval of whatever crime or wrongdoing my government commits. Case closed.

          • Steve Humble

            nugatorious presuppositions?? Put away the thesaurus and stop trying to impress us with your condescending pseudo-intellectual BS. The article is partially correct in stating that in retrospect Western intervention in Libya’s regime change was a vacuous and strategic error. America’s foreign policy history is punctuated with many examples of imperialistic strategies using covert ops to coerce political change from a climate of gov’t oppression to one that emulates democratic values that emphasize respect for human rights and freedoms. As in the case of Libya, the aftermath of such an intervention has produced a vacuum of leadership into which ISIS and other terrorist org. have emerged. We get that. But to insinuate that it’s human nature for terrorists to “retaliate” with regard for the ideology that drives the slaughter of the innocent is unconscionable. “I stand with the American people”??? BS. You stand with the terrorists and make excuses for their horrific crimes against the innocence of humanity. You should be investigated. I’m serious.

          • Toto

            Steve Humble,

            I was not going to address anymore idiots, but I will make an exception with you.

            First, there was no thesaurus. If you use one, that is OK. That is what they are for. As a matter of fact, maybe you should get one and substitute phrases like “strategic error”, “imperialistic strategies” and “political change” with: criminal, murderous and illegal.

            “Political change from a climate of gov’t oppression to one that emulates democratic values that emphasize respect for human rights and freedoms”… are you serious?????…

            Oh yeah! wait you must be talking about Iran 1953, ousting the elected Mossadegh and replacing him with the Shah of Iran, I heard he was very democratic! Or are you referring to 1954 Guatemala when Jacobo Arbenz was removed and replaced with a nice democratic dictator named Carlos Castillo Armas? Maybe Chile? 1973? Ousting Allende and installing Pinochet? Another epitome of democratic values! Batista in Cuba? Brazil 1964 when the United States backed a coup led by Humberto Castello Branco, then chief of staff of the Brazilian army ? The list is longer, but I’ll stop now.

            Before you get the notion that I am a communist or support communism, let me keep you from going there since I left a communist country and always have denounced the detriments of communism. What I mention is factual, and not a defensive posture of any regime, communist or not. It has to do with removing the biased and blinding veils that are caused when we take sides just “because”… and in the process abandon truth, logic and reality.

            As a side note, digest this: Cuba has an embargo placed against it, but China is a most favored nation, yet they are both communist. Syria and Iran are repressive and oppressive, and must be dealt with. But Saudi Arabia is not., right? Therefore they are our great cozy friends and we sell them lots of nice weapons that probably are for controlling the women, gays, and other religions there since they have so much freedom and power and are taking over the country! Yes? Can you explain these inconsistencies and double standards please?

            And yes, it is human to retaliate and kill innocent civilians. I did not say “humane”, I said human, because that’s what humans do most of the time during conflicts, war or civil strife and unrest. In case you failed history class, remember Hiroshima and Nagasaki, there were innocent elderly people, women and children that were slaughtered by something called an atomic bomb. It was retaliation for Pearl Harbor and the atrocities committed by the Japanese military, I believe…but of course, you may know better and correct me.

            Remember Dresden??! Fire bombed by the British and the US out of retaliation for what the Nazis had done. The innocent women and children there were slaughtered.

            When 19 Saudis (we are told) brought down the Twin Towers, there was retaliation… against Iraq… who was not involved, and yes, thousands or hundreds of thousands, INNOCENT women and children have been slaughtered.

            Hitler slaughtered innocent Jews in retaliation for what he considered Jew betrayal. And what about the Indian Wars here in the US? Many countries throughout history have engaged in slaughtering innocent people at some time for the purpose of retaliation, or just for plain greed and power (England, France, Spain, Rome etc etc) Research it! Humans do retaliate and slaughter! Accept it as a fact, even though we do not like it.

            Seems you are devoid of clarity due to the insertion of your head into some dark crevice. And yes, go ahead and investigate me!! I am sure I am right in there along with the “Russian meddling”, the “robbery” of Rich Seth and the video that instigated Benghazi.

            You Sir, have stepped into the same quicksand as Karen Benjamin.

            And finally, YOU failed to impress me with YOUR BS! Have a great day!

          • Toto

            To Jake Pereira,
            hi Jake, no, I did not drop the mike… but thanks for being attentive to the surroundings… it’s a good sign.
            ps, si hablas español te sugiero que no incurras en locuciones oligofrénicas las cuales no ayudan a nadie ni contribuyen a un dialogo constructivo. A veces, nuestras propias palabras y acciones pudiesen tornarse de forma ignominiosa en contra de nosotros mismos. Saludos y buen día.

          • francis mcanarney

            First, do any of you know why white people have everything and why America is so powerful? The answer lies in the religious and political policies set in history. In 771-814 AD, Charlemagne was King of all Western Europe and he MANDATED FORMAL EDUCATION for all people under his rule. He also MANDATED CATHOLIC CHURCH attendance and teachings. Charlemagne was a CATHOLIC and he followed the teachings of Jesus Christ. CATHOLIC core value is to educate all. Another important core value is that according to Catholic Christian teachings, marriages of consanguineous relations were strongly prohibited. This means that you cannot marry a blood relative closer than second cousin. The beneficiaries of his mandated rule were the people who lived in Western Europe, and as we know, those people were white. He also mandated that all people adhere to and follow one united currency.

            When Europeans migrated to America, they brought EDUCATION AND CATHOLIC CHRISTIANITY with them. Canada and Australia were also predominately Christian and white and educated. From 771 to 1945, whites have basically had 1131 years of Christian values and education head start over “people of color”.

            So why didn’t people of color progress at the same rate as the people of Western Europe?

            Here is a fact. Every “nation of color”, had leaders and had policies set in place that oppressed their citizens. The religious and political leaders, which were all pagan, non Christian, or Islamic all supported consanguineous marriages, did not provide education for their citizens because they wanted to rule over stupid and uneducated masses. The leaders wanted to stay in power. So if “people of color” want to complain about inequality, please complain about the culture from where you came. Maybe “people of color” should take a culture competency program to learn why your history has been one of oppression and slavery, and why you came to America to escape that slavery and oppression. America has the Christian VALUES of EDUCATION does not allow the consanguineous marriages, has the Christian values. America has over 4700 degree granting institutions, and that is more educational institutions that the REST OF THE WORLD COMBINED. “People of color” spend too much time trying to inflict blame on white Americans, when they should put the real blame on their cultural history. Welcome to America, but send your grievances to your culture and country of origin, and if you cant do that then send your sorry ass back to the shithole you came from.

        • Toto

          Karen Benjamin,

          With regard to the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, yes you are correct that they existed before 2011 (1995) . But they were NOT allowed to exist “freely” and without impunity which is the point the article makes!!! The article NEVER said there were absolutely none! Just that no group existed so freely and rampant like al Quaeda/Isis/al Nusra now. You have forged a combative and argumentative missive out of thin air accusing the article of something it did not say and in the process becoming annoyingly disputatious. Again this is what the article said —> [ there was no al-Qaeda, ISIS, or any other related terrorist organization operating (at least with impunity) on Libyan soil]…. for God’s sake!!!..learn how to read!!!

          And for the record, the LIFG admitted trying to assassinate Khadafi in 1996 with the funding of the MI6. Hmmm? Could that be the West (Britain) meddling and attempting regime change by assassination?

          • Toto

            correction: I meant… ” But they were NOT allowed to exist “freely” and with impunity which is the point the article makes!!!

          • Bob Rodgers

            That was one of the best articulations ive read yet of whats gone on and is going on in the middle east. Keep taking these misinformed, pompous keyboard warriors to school toto!

    • Ilena Falk

      Karen, You might like the book I mentioned in my comment, written by Engdahl. It’s very interesting and well documented. I’m sorry, but Most of Islam WAS moderate Islam. Not the radicalized form that we are seeing increasing across the world. The USA allies itself with some of the most disgusting regimes in the M.E., yet has invaded and destroyed the most secularized and Moderate nations. Something else is obviously going on.

      • Toto

        Thank you Ilena for your educated, documented and pertinent contribution to this forum. Very refreshing to see intelligent people that “get it”… Now, if more people would take the time to inform themselves of what our government does “out there”. One thing is to love one’s country, another to wrap ourselves so tightly with the flag that we cover our eyes.

    • Mark Madar

      HI Karen,
      I must say that I am taken back by the nativity and simple-mindedness of your response.
      For ease of reference, please see below. I will keep my responses short and sweet so you can make sense of it (hopefully).
      1. As Toto mentioned in one of his responses- The article DOES NOT say Al Qaeda did not exist before 2011.
      2. It is a known fact that the removal of the government in Iraq and Libya by western super powers is the root cause of the conflagration in those countries. The situation could have potentially been avoided if we had a better exit strategy….

      With regards to Syria- I welcome you to seek info on this yourelf and make up your mind.
      3. There are 1.7 billion Muslims in the world and less than 16000 terrorists. I do not thing it is fair to associate Muslims with these cannibals. Furthermore, I think it is wholly unacceptable to even include their views in a debate alongside real Muslims.
      4. This article is about how the interventions of these countries without a suitable exit strategy has resulted in the current situation and not about the history of violence in Iran, KSA, Yeman, Qatar, Bahrain, Kuwait, Lebanon, Syria, Libya, Egypt, Pakistan etc.

      On another note- As you know, we have a rich history of violence, killings, enslaving masses, genocide, use of nuclear etc etc etc… Let’s avoid the HISTORY OF VIOLENCE speech.
      5. About education- that is untrue and wholly unfounded. I suggest you familiarise yourselves Muslim countries and their education system.
      I invest in extremely poor Muslim countries in Africa and I can tell you that even the poorest countries have decent educational standard because of the different charity outreach programs and DFI’s in today’s society.

      6. I agree with you- It is not ONLY THE FAULT of western society. I accept the fact that lots of mistakes which led to the creation of certain terror groups. Having said this, the focus should be to deal with the problem instead of empowering a blame culture.

      Once we deal with these barbaric pigs, we can look back and perhaps review
      Have a great day everyone.


      P.S. disclaimer. Not spelled or grammar checked. Who cares? We are all adults who are debating an important topic during our spare time!