NATO admitted today that it had been bombing inside the city of Misrata for the last three weeks using “certain weapons” which differentiate between pro-and anti-Gadaffi fighters. None of the assembled press corps asked the obvious question – in an urban environment how do bombs differentiate between the warring sides and civilians?
Its Royal Wedding day and a good day to release the information in front of a supine crowd of journalists at the end of a long press conference – with no transcript provided for the lazy journalists.
So today Brigadier Rob Weighill, Operations Director of Operation Unified Protector, delivered this information:
“NATO, for the last three weeks, has been using certain weapons, in certain parts of the city, where we can discriminate between anti-and pro-Gadaffi forces and we have been very successful in supporting the anti-Gadaffi forces in pushing their perimeter out.”
The bombing of the city of Misrata by NATO forces should be condemned by human rights organisations.
Brigadier Weighill tried to duck the question of whether NATO would allow weapons to be transported from one Libyan port to another – with the clear implication that the rebels would be allowed (as “the forces protecting civilians”) but the loyalist forces not.
It is unfortunately clear that NATO has been allowing military logistics into the city of Misrata to resupply the rebels, under the guise of humanitarian shipments.
As Ruth Sherlock reported on her voyage into Misrata, when challenged by NATO forces,
“The rebel fighters tore cardboard boxes into signs, scribbling “Misrata logistics” in barely discernible green ink, shouting “Allahu akhbar” and trying to give the “V” for victory sign.”
The smuggling of weapons shipments under the guise of aid shipments should be condemned by human rights organisations and is a violation of international law.