"That Kenya's new president was elected in what could be easily interpreted as a major slight against the already teetering legitimacy of the ICC and the corporate-financier interests that contrived and currently perpetuate the institution, appears to be the most compelling motive behind the recent attack in Nairobi."~~ Tony Cartalucci
by Tony Cartalucci
[Land Destroyer Report] What are the chances that family members of Kenyan President Uhuru Kenyatta just so happened to be visiting Nairobi's Westgate Mall in the midst of an unprecedented cross-border attack by Al Qaeda Al Shabaab terrorists - and that these family members were successfully singled out and murdered? The BBC reported in its article, "Nairobi Westgate attack: The victims," that:
President Uhuru Kenyatta's nephew Mbugua Mwangi and his fiancee Rosemary Wahito are among the many Kenyans killed in the attack on the Westgate shopping centre.
What are the chances that Al Qaeda is armed and funded by the US from Afghanistan in the 1980's, to Libya in 2011, and now Syria to undermine enemies of Wall Street and London, but not in Somalia to undermine neighboring Kenya whose new president won partly due to a popular backlash against the West's discredited International Criminal Court (ICC)?
Indeed, Kenyan President Uhuru Kenyatta was charged by the ICC for "crimes against humanity" even as he ran for president. The Kenyan newspaper, the Standard, published "Is history repeating itself as Uhuru Kenyatta, like father, faces trial?," where current President Kenyatta's persecution by the ICC is seen as a parallel to the persecution of his father, Jomo Kenyatta, by British colonial rule. It stated:
In April 2011, Ngengi Muigai, a close relative of Uhuru drew parallels between his charges at the ICC and the trial, jailing and unlawful detention of his father by the British colonial government.
How much can a wife and a mother bear? Her husband's tribulations from the British colonialists and now her son from the neo-colonialists said Ngengi.
Mama Ngina had said at the same venue: I'm sure Uhuru, Ruto and the rest will go to The Hague and come back so that we can proceed with nation building.
She said this on the day she laid hands on both her son and Ruto as she prayed for their safe return from The Hague.
She said the charges facing her son and his co-suspects were the work of neo-colonialists and urged Kenyans to stand by Uhuru and resist just like they had resisted the British colonial rule.
The colonialists gave us problems and it is now clear they have never relented, said the former First Lady.
The former first lady is not alone in viewing the ICC as the modern day successor of old European subjugation and colonization. President Kenyatta's persecution by the ICC is a tell-tale sign that he has made enemies in the West. The ICC itself is a discredited institution openly collaborating alongside NATO and in particular, the US, UK, and France to target political enemies around the world.
This would be made abundantly clear in Libya in 2011, where the ICC played a crucial role in NATO's propaganda campaign against Tripoli when ICC prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo "confirmed" that Libyan leader Muammar Qaddafi's son Saif Al-Islam was "captured" by Libyan militants and en route to the Hague. Saif Al-Islam would turn up the next day, very much free and still leading the defense of Tripoli - meaning the ICC lied as part of a wider NATO psychological operation to portray Libya's capital as overwhelmed and captured.
The ICC, is wholly rejected by the African Union (AU), as noted by the Economist's piece, "Shooting your own feet," where it states:
Heads of state from across the continent gathered in Addis Ababa, the Ethiopian capital, on May 27th to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the African Union and its forerunner, the Organisation of African Unity. They congratulated themselves on how well they had supposedly co-operated in decades past, then spiced things up a little by firing off broadsides at the International Criminal Court in The Hague. Led by the Ethiopian prime minister, Hailemariam Desalegn, who chairs the union at the moment, they variously accused the court of racism and “hunting” Africans.
The Economist, with its usual neo-imperialist hubris, maintained that respecting the ICC would be essential for the continued rise of Africa, as it was part of the "international rules" Africa must follow in order to continue attracting foreign investment.
When an arrest warrant was issued for Libyan leader Muammar Qaddafi by the Western institution, the AU rejected it as well. AP reported in their article, "African Union disregards Gaddafi arrest warrant," that:
The body representing African nations has called on its members to disregard the arrest warrant issued for Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, in a move that will seriously weaken the International Criminal Court's ability to bring him to justice.
The crumbling of the West's "international institutions" represents a decline in their global influence and their ability to empty the third world of its resources for their own benefit. Those on the African continent and elsewhere that challenge the West's international order, pay for it with swift reprisals be they crippling economic sanctions, covert military operations, or in Libya's case, full scale military aggression.
That Kenya's new president was elected in what could be easily interpreted as a major slight against the already teetering legitimacy of the ICC and the corporate-financier interests that contrived and currently perpetuate the institution, appears to be the most compelling motive behind the recent attack in Nairobi. If nations are allowed to openly defy and erode the West's status as self-proclaimed international arbiter, the very large house of geopolitical socioeconomic cards built upon this shaky table will fall with it.
Indeed, just as the West used listed terror organization, the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) in Libya, and now the Al Nusra front in Syria, to target and overthrow governments of their disliking, Al Shabaab who maintains direct ties to both of these terror organizations appears to have been turned loose on Kenya.
The attack in Nairobi represents a scale and level of sophistication that requires state-sponsorship and intelligence on par with at least that inside Kenya in order to target and murder the president's family members. That state sponsorship most certainly is not somewhere in Kenya's northern neighbor of Somalia, but more likely in Washington, London, Paris, Tel Aviv, Doha and/or Riyadh.
Attacking a mall full of civilians, at face value, represents very low-level short-sighted strategic thinking, however the scale of the operation, and considering that the president's family members were present and singled out, indicates a much higher level of sophistication - a level of sophistication that would easily determine that such an attack would serve to galvanize the Kenyan public behind US AFRICOM's military adventurism across Africa in pursuit of "Al Qaeda," Kony, and others, not against it.
As the facts continue to emerge, and with Western leaders calling on the world to once again quickly and collectively react based on emotions of rage, hatred, and fear, the basic questions of "qui bono?" and who actually possessed the operational capacity to carry out or at least steer such an attack, must be asked and answered. If indeed Al Shabaab carried out this attack, were they armed, funded, and steered by Western special interests as their associates within the ranks of LIFG and Al Nusra are in Libya and Syria? What pressure will Kenya be put under in the wake of this attack by the West to act out across its borders in tandem with ongoing AFRICOM campaigns?
For Kenya's future, reason and facts must prevail - not emotions and propaganda.
America's debt clock real time