Gaddafi

Gaddafi would be better to receive a nobel prize than Obama. Gaddafi never wanted war. Obama just continues it, and sends more troops everywhere. Theyr'e just hired guns, not America's army exactly.

*yawn*

100% Agree

A++ POST OP

US Special Forces Spotted On Al Jazeera In Libya On The Front
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nnDUS-MR2g8

>>1
1 - Send assassination squads all over the world to shut up the slightest critics for "insulting" you.
2 - Spread propaganda to countless american conspiracy idiots about how you're completely innocent, and that it's all Americas fault.
3 - Win nobel peace prize.

"The person in open support of terrorism around the world, deserves a nobel peace prize. What's "the Abu Salim prison massacre"? What's a "death squad"? All I know of is Obama, and I heard he's the president of America right now, and that's pretty bad if you ask me."
- 4chan conspiracy nutter

Obama ended the brutal American military dictatorship over the oppressed peoples of Iraq and Afghanistan once and for all, he closed the American concentration camps all over the world and his free health care system brought the American people one huge step further towards first world standards. This man is a saint and he deserves the price.

What did Gaddafi do?

>>7
You realize he hasn't actually accomplished any of those things yet. Right?

You know workers apart of the military industrial complex will lose jobs if we dont sell or go to war. People complain about corporate lobbying but individuals, employers and unions lobby a lot for these businesses.

>>9
If you take a closer look at that, it's insane. Generating unnecessary government consumption to generate superfluous work to distribute goods to the working class. Just to keep the system running as it is. People don't like to work, so they shouldn't have to work when not necessary.

I live in a welfare state with relatively high taxation, it has a lot of its own problems, but it never had to go to war to prevent unemployment and poverty in the lowest classes. 32 hour work weeks, a four week paid vacation per year and a generous social spending on every level do the trick too. We don't need to generate values only to let politicians waste them in the next second. Where we waste them, we waste them the convenient way. With a good private life.

WEEEEEEEP WEEEEEP WEEP!!!!! *tears help bring more flooding down to New Orleans*

ASSHOLES!!! >8

>>7
"What did Gaddafi do?"
This right here, is newpols problem.
Get a fucking clue before you open your big fat mouths.
Gaddafi is one of the most notorious despots in modern times, but you were all born yesterday, so all you know about is Obama, and have the combined ambition to read excyclopedias equal to that of a nigger, yet you desperately want to have an opinion.

>>12
You failed. Next!

Invading Libia is a best thing that could happen in our economy crisis, we are like Robbin hood, taking his gold and providing it to poorer countries (greace), new libian goverment will have to buy everything from higher developed countries (EU)boosting our economy. Obama,Sarcosy and others deserve Nobel price again

>>10
A 40 hour work week isn't a big deal.

>>15
Pfft, you wage slave.  30 hours is enough for anyone.  Get your boss to cut your hours for the same money for an instant pay rise.  You then get to tell prospective employers that you're earning 30% more than you were.

>>14
>Invading Libia is a best thing that could happen in our economy crisis
Overthrowing a legitimate government is a good thing? I would have understood if the rebels did it themselves - it would have proved that it represents the will of its people. But bombing civilians and invading with foreign military (NATO special forces, Qatari mercenaries, etc.) - isn't_fucking_democratic! Basically, it violates UN resolutions and human rights (the fundamental thing of democracy). Crisis or no, this is absolutely wrong.
>we are like Robbin hood, taking his gold and providing it to poorer countries (greace)
Implying it is something to be proud of. Your crisis is your own fault, while there are a lot of peaceful civilians in Libya you have doomed to live in poverty, chaos and banditism. Do you consider them subhuman to suffer instead of you, because of your own problems?
Second, the whole operation costed more than the gold taken - you do realize that petrol, bombs, keeping planes in working condition while actively using them, making mass media lie, etc. - is a HELL lot of money? You haven't prevented economic crisis, idiot, you accelerated its arrival! Oil and gold may compensate it a bit, but in destabilized country, turned into second Somali, its much more problematic than its worth.
>new libian goverment will have to buy everything from higher developed countries (EU)boosting our economy
How? It is a poor country now, even the money you have taken from Gaddafi has already been stolen. They won't buy anything from you, because they don't have money and they barely control the territory. Just like Somali.
What could have boosted your economy - was letting Libya develop. It could have grown into prosperous civilized country both to your and their benefits. Peaceful beneficial coexistence. Now enjoy the consequences of the chaos, you have created. Terrorist nests right nearby Europe, pirates in the Mediterranean sea, SWARMS of migrants from africa - enjoy!
>Obama,Sarcosy and others deserve Nobel price again
They should be hanged as war criminals

>>17
legitimate government
Since it was the Libyan people who did the overthrowing, what defines the legitimacy of a government?

>>18
The majority of the Libyan people are still loyal to Gadaffi.
In a democratic society, majority wins.

>>19
Muslims have no loyalty. They'll just replace Gadaffi with another Gadaffi.

>>20

Eh? One minute muslims are indoctrinated, un-changable, mindless war-drones who are devoted to a cause. The next minute they "have no loyalty". I wish you haters would make up your mind.
Also, who they choose to elect is their own damn buisness. If we kill Gadaffi, force their country into an election, and they elect a Gaddafi clone... so what? It's democracy. Shouldn't you be happy?

>>12
He is a despot. A dictator. A tyrant.... I still say so fucking what? What did he do that was wrong? Why is being a dictator automatically a bad thing? Why is being democratic autmatically a good thing?
What, justifies, this, war?

>>21
I still say so fucking what? What did he do that was wrong?
Idiot. From wikipedia:

Crimes against humanity arrest warrant

The UN referred the massacres of unarmed civilians to the International Criminal Court.[205] Among the crimes being investigated by the prosecution is whether Gaddafi purchased and authorized the use of Viagra-like drugs among soldiers for the purpose of raping women and instilling fear.[206] His government's heavy-handed approach to quelling the protests was characterized by the International Federation for Human Rights as a strategy of scorched earth. The acts of "indiscriminate killings of civilians" was charged as crimes against humanity, as defined in Article 7 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.[207]

On 27 June 2011 the International Criminal Court issued an arrest warrant for Gaddafi, accusing him of crimes against humanity and of ordering attacks on civilians in Libya.[19] Arrest warrants were also issued for his son Saif al-Islam Gaddafi and the intelligence chief Abdullah Senussi.[19] The presiding judge, Sanji Monageng, stated that there were "reasonable grounds to believe" that Gaddafi and Saif al-Islam were "criminally responsible as indirect co-perpetrators" for the murder of civilians.[208] She added that they "conceived and orchestrated a plan to deter and quell by all means the civilian demonstrations" and that Senussi used his position to have attacks carried out.[209] Libyan officials rejected the ICC's authority, saying that the ICC has "no legitimacy whatsoever" and that "all of its activities are directed at African leaders".[208]

The International Criminal Court (ICC) issued arrest warrants for Gaddafi, his son Saif al-Islam, and Abdullah al-Senussi, head of state security for charges concerning crimes against humanity on 27 June 2011.[210][211] According to Matt Steinglass of The Financial Times the charges call for Gaddafi, and his two co-conspirators, to "stand trial for the murder and persecution of demonstrators by Libyan security forces since the uprising based in the country’s east that began in February." This makes him the second still-serving state-leader to have warrants issued against them, the first being Omar al-Bashir of Sudan.[211]

A Libyan government representative, justice minister Mohammed al-Qamoodi, responded by saying that "The leader of the revolution and his son do not hold any official position in the Libyan government and therefore they have no connection to the claims of the ICC against them ..."[210]

Russia and other countries, including China and Germany, abstained from voting in the UN[212] and have not joined the NATO coalition, which has taken action in Libya by bombing the government's forces. Mikhail Margelov, the Kremlin special representative for Africa, speaking in an interview for Russian newspaper Izvestia, said that the "Kremlin accepted that Col Gaddafi [sic] had no political future and that his family would have to relinquish its vice-like grip on the Libyan economy."[213] He also said that "It is quite possible to solve the situation without the colonel".[213]

>>19
The majority of the Libyan people are still loyal to Gadaffi.
And how would you know this if they are under a totalitarian regime where political opponents, real or perceived, are routinely tortured and executed?

>>21
What is your problem? Are you unable to spell to "Wikipedia", or what?
I want to try that too:
Your moms pussy is disgusting.
Why isn't it disgusting? Because you say so?
I still say so fucking what! I want a sample!
I'm an idiot! Prove me wrong!

I also think >>22 is an idiot, because he fucking fell for it. Don't feed these idiots! Let them die of brain failure!

Libyan rebels are racist

Media habitually tells us that Libyan rebels are noble freedom fighters, struggling aganist a bloodthirsty tyrant. But after all the buckets of half-truths and blatant lies, that news poured on our heads, treating us viewers like brainless sheep and feeding us half-baked reports that often got disproved the next day, some of us started to look further and investigate. What they found out, is extremely disturbing. Say, from the very beginning of war we've been hearing reports about "Gaddafi's black mercenaries". We even saw photos and videos of several people that, supposedly, were these mercenaries. But the whole truth is much more complicated - and scary.

Yes, there indeed are several divisions of black Africans and citizens of Chad in the army of Libya, that is formed on the principle of territorial militia. But they can hardly be considered mercenaries - not more than French Foreign Legion or non-American citizens in US Army. In general, the status of black men of Libyan army's various units is civil servants.

In a country with 6 million inhabitants, one third are black (the most oppressed group in the country). Would not it be easier for the rebels to call for their solidarity and ask them join the rebel ranks? But not only black Libyans do not join the rebellion - they flee in terror.

The first wave of reports and evidence of beatings of black Africans began in February and March. The rebels, under the trademark of fighting with the mercenaries from Chad, were slaughtering all black people with no mercy. They even started to post various Youtube videos with their actions filmed (like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C8bpNgB1oEk The victim was the Libyan citizen Hisham Mansour, born 22-02-1983). Back in early March, the Human Rights Watch even warned black migrant workers on the need to flee the revolutionary terrain.

"We left behind our friends from Chad. We left behind their bodies. We had 70 or 80 people from Chad working for our company. They cut them dead with pruning shears and axes, attacking them, saying you're providing troops for Gaddafi. The Sudanese, the Chadians were massacred. We saw it ourselves. I am a worker, not a fighter. They took me from my house and [raped] my wife", - a Turkish oilfield worker, who fled Libya, told BBC in February 25.

One of the editors of the Monthly Review, Yoshie Furuhashi, writes:

"The black African workers now live in fear in the territories held by the rebels in Libya. Some have been attacked by mobs, some have been imprisoned and some of their houses and shops have been torched. Many African workers say they felt safer under the regime of Gaddafi".

In March, a reporter from the Daily Mail was in Benghazi and reported:

"Africans I saw ranged from a 20 year old and a late forties, with a grizzled beard. Most wore casual clothes. When they realized that I spoke English erupted in protests. "We did nothing," one told me, before he was silenced. "We are all construction workers in Ghana. Do not harm anyone. "

Another accused, a man in green overalls, showed the paint on their sleeves and said: "This is my job. I do not know how to shoot a gun "

Abdul Nasser, 47, protested: "They lie about us. They took us out of our house at night when we were asleep. " While still complaining, they were taken.

International Business Times published an article on March 2 that says:

"According to reports, over 150 black Africans at least a dozen different countries escaped from Libya by plane and landed at the airport in Nairobi, Kenya, with horrific stories of violence."

"We were attacked by locals who said they were mercenaries who killed people. I mean blacks who refused to see "Julius told Reuters Kiluu, a construction supervisor for 60 years.

Michel Collon with a fact-finding delegation were in Libya in July and when he learned what had happened, he said:

"I met these people during my research in Tripoli. I could talk to some people. They were not "mercenaries," as the rebels and the media tell. Some were dark-skinned Libyans (much of the population is of African type, in fact), others were black civilians from African countries who stayed in Libya for a long time. All support Gaddafi precisely because he opposes to racism and treats them as Arabs and Africans on an equal footing. On the contrary, the rebels in Benghazi are known for their racism, and blacks were victims of terrible systematic atrocities. The paradox is that NATO wants to bring democracy to a section of Al Qaeda and Libyan Ku Klux Klan-type racists".

Here's another footage, with English explanations given: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T2IBT_dQpEY

After the rebels entered Tripoli, numerous reports of black men being killed appeared again. Twitter explodes with rebels' messages about killing "African mercenaries". In the chaos of embattled Tripoli, black people are being simply seized from the streets and taken somewhere openly.

http://i56.tinypic.com/63tx15.jpg

On the photo above we can see that the dead people's hands are tied with plastic handcuffs and their clothes are relatively clean. This means these people were captured not after a fight, but deliberately.

The Colonel was being building good relations with the south of Africa. NATO plan of destabilizing Libya might as well include having the black Africans turning away from this country forever, using contempt and xenophobia of the rebels as a driving force of the persecution. After all, lynching black people simply for being in Africa sounds ridiculous. But results are pretty much of the same racist kind, and they are not funny at all.

>>25
tl;dr:
Libyan rebels are posting YouTube videos from Libya. The only ones having access to YouTube from Libya is Ghaddafi government workers. The rest have been blocked since last years Salim massacre protests.
OP is spreading false propaganda.

Heh. It appears that well-connected (former government) Ghaddafi supporters have taken the battle to YouTube (with the "Libyancouncil" YouTube channel just being one of several spreaders of false propaganda). If you want to partake in Libyas fight for real freedom, you can flag the videos on all these channels for "supporting terrorism", because Gaddafi is no longer acknowledged as the leader of Libya, and even when he ruled, he stood for both regular terrorism (bombings) and state terrorism.

>>26
>The only ones having access to YouTube from Libya is Ghaddafi government workers. The rest have been blocked since last years
Well, not anymore. Since rebels control the situation, it is not surprising that the access to YouTube in Libya appeared back.

>>27
>even when he ruled, he stood for both regular terrorism (bombings) and state terrorism.
Nope. He stopped supporting terrorism for a decade already. Should I remind you, that USA once had connections with Al-Quaeda, too?
And currently Gaddafi stood against terrorism, unlike rebels - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PgBzZtzqQ_M

>>26
Hooking up a laptop to a mobile phone is 90s era technology. Not sure what you're thinking here.

A long time Gaddafi was a good partner to US and EU governments, they done a lot of businesses, but now suddenly he became a dictator in the public eye and in the governments opinion. It is kind of treachery isn't it?

>>31
So much facepalm.
I fully believe that you believe this. I fully believe that you're not a troll or on Gaddafis payroll, and that you're just a stupid american that actually believes this, because Bush has shown that americans really can be this stupid.

Gaddafi has always been a ruthless dictator. Always. It's just that he has made damn sure to manufacture good PR for himself to cover up assassinations, massacres and countless civil rights violations. Gaddafis relations toward the US is that he has been applauding terrorist bombings, and he never missed a chance to fuck with the other members of the UN. Gaddafi has even held a speech in the UN, where he spoke about there being no actual loyalty between the countries - just business.

>>29
What Libya is revolting against now, is his STATE terrorism.

>>33
Not really. It's tribal, actually. What Gaddafi did was pretty normal. Gaddafi was a bit insane.

The people who will replace him will be just as bad. The EU will make a lot of money 'helping' the new government. Life goes on in durkaville.

Gaddafi has always enjoyed majority support in Libya.  The problem has been in how he has maintained it.

>>34
Not "as bad". Much worse.
Libya was the most prosperous country in Europe and promised soon to become as prosperous as European. In time it could peacefully turn into democracy - Gaddafi's sons had more european democratic mindset and Libya was ALREADY the most civilized and least oppressive of the muslim countries.
Now Libya is a poor, half-destroyed shadow of its former self. It is not only thrown 40 years back, but became second Somali - a pure chaos, where government will control just few regions of one city, while others are swarming with terrorists. Is it worth spreading democracy? Replacing a reasonable dictator with savage gangs of fundamentalists?

>>36
>the most prosperous country in AFRICA
selffix

>>36
Lybia - most prosperous? In what regard?
Least opressive? Now you're bullshitting me.
I can buy that Libya was aiming for democracy, but when you have a merciless military dictator (Gaddafi) standing in the way of it, you end up with a necessary democratic revolution. Nepotism doesn't lead to democracy.

>>38
>Lybia - most prosperous? In what regard?
Decent salary ($1000), free medicine, free education, free housing, etc. Compare this to other African countries or even to some Eastern European countries.
>Least opressive? Now you're bullshitting me.
Name me another muslim country where women are treated with respect.
>a necessary democratic revolution.
Then why do these arabic democratic revolutions result in fundamentalists coming to power? Do you even realize that some societies may not be ready for democracy yet and that so called "democratic revolutions" are just the the means for another undemocratic group to rise to power? Middle East mentality is such a delicate matter - crude methods simply won't work we way you expect them to.
Gaddafi wasn't saint, but he was much better than those who will assume power in Libya now.

>>39
It's true that Libya had an unusually high standard of living, though most of that was due to oil wealth, it's like a diluted version of Dubai. It's also true that Libya looks like Somalia right now but so does every wartorn country, they are on the mediterranean, they have the world's attention, an educated urbanized population and of course oil, it will pass. The new leader will probably fill the same political niche Gaddafi did but he will make the concessions Gaddafi didn't and as Libya's economy develops like many emerging markets around the world the political scene will liberalize.

>>39
The oil resources will still profit libyans in the future, except now the money isn't regulated by Gaddafi.

Yes, if you happen to be a woman, you'll end up getting equally opressed as men are. You're still not allowed freedom of speech, and so on, under penalty of death.

When you had a despot whose national anthem was "Allah is great", and you now replace it with a government whose motto is "Freedom, Justice, Democracy!", then it's pretty clear that Gaddafis rule was much more fundamentalist.

>>41
>The oil resources will still profit libyans in the future, except now the money isn't regulated by Gaddafi.
The oil resourses will be in hands of foreign companies and so they will profit europeans, while Libya itself will get little money. Neo-colonialism politics.
>You're still not allowed freedom of speech, and so on, under penalty of death.
Penalty of death? Now you're bullshitting me.
>When you had a despot whose national anthem was "Allah is great"
English anthem is "God save the Queen". American motto is "In God we trust". "Allah" simply means "God" in arabic. How is that different?
>and you now replace it with a government whose motto is "Freedom, Justice, Democracy!", then it's pretty clear that Gaddafis rule was much more fundamentalist.
Such words are empty. The rebels have many Al-Qaeda terrorists among their ranks and these terrorists are the most capable and skilled military force among them. So the democratic rulers will (at best) control some parts of few cities like in Somali, or (at worst) will be got rid of.

>>42
Before Gaddafi:
A government drilled the oil, embezzled half of it, and gave some percentage to the people for free, making libyan money worthless through inflation.
After Gaddafi:
Skilled oil companies drills the oil, gives the government any percentage they demand, and they use this money to improve Libyas infrastructure, actually profiting the libyan people.

Before Gaddafi:
If you as much as said publicly that Libya didn't have freedom of speech, and you weren't famous, Gaddafi would send death squads to whereever you lived, EVEN IF YOU THOUGHT YOU WERE LIVING SAFELY IN EUROPE, and assassinate you. If you were a famous activist, you would instead be dragged before a libyan court charged with insulting, and even conspiring to KILL, Gaddafi, and if you weren't sentenced to death, you'd be brought to a lifetime prison, to be killed in a prison massacre by Gaddafi.
After Gaddafi:
Democratic rights.

"God is great!" ("Allahu akbar!") is the exact phrase that fundamentalist fanatics say before they detonate their suicide bombs. Would the anthem be "Allah save Gaddafi" it wouldn't be as bad.

A revolution will require capable fighters, so any rebel wanting illegal guns and expertize to overthrow a government, would have to deal with shady elements - I'm certainly not thinking lesser of them for it. It would be another matter if they would forcefully try to appoint fundamentalists to rule the government, but as it is now, canidates are being appointed for a democratic election, and this time the canidates are not secretly working for a despot.

>>43
>making libyan money worthless through inflation.
As a person, who once traveled there, I can say that you could buy pretty much there. The only problem was aquiring alcohol, because it was officially banned and you could get it only through smugglers.
That plus free housing, free medicine, free education, little taxes made living conditions there quite fine.
>Skilled oil companies drills the oil, gives the government any percentage they demand
Skilled oil Russian and Chinese companies were already invited by Gaddafi, giving him percentage he demanded.
Now the situation will be like it was in Russia in the 90s - European and American lapdog companies extracted oil, while giving the country less than 20% of the profits.
>Gaddafi would send death squads
Fanatical nonsense and bullshit
>Democratic rights.
You mean things like this? Hardly any difference
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6bVa6jn4rpE
>"God is great!" ("Allahu akbar!") is the exact phrase that fundamentalist fanatics say before they detonate their suicide bombs.
Do you know that many peaceful muslims frequently say "Allahu akbar!"? Do you know that arabian christians also say "Allahu akbar!"? Seriously, your ignorance could fill the oceans.
>A revolution will require capable fighters, so any rebel wanting illegal guns and expertize to overthrow a government, would have to deal with shady elements - I'm certainly not thinking lesser of them for it.
Dealing with shady elements is one thing - overthrowing a lesser evil with the help of a much bigger one is entirely different.
>It would be another matter if they would forcefully try to appoint fundamentalists to rule the government
Oh, no need for "forcefully". In Palestine the Hamas extremists were elected absolutely democratically.
>canidates are being appointed for a democratic election
Technically, Somali has democratic government. In fact, the legitimate democratic government controls less than a half of just one city.

>Do you know that many peaceful muslims frequently say "Allahu akbar!"

Those are called dead Muslims. They say it and set off the bomb. Then they are peaceful.

>You mean things like this? Hardly any difference

If he was in the Middle East, he would have been tortured and executed.

>>45
>>46
You have run out of arguments, I see.

All these nations run on the "strongman" social organization. And the West is just trying to impose their own strongmen. Nothing will change for the general public, except for McDonald's moving in.

>>47
Actually, that wasn't even me. I might reply tomorrow.

>>44
Inflation is something that sneaks up on a country. Couple that with the government severing relations with foreign businesses when they decided to rob the oil companies without warning, and you have an eventual economical disaster waiting to happen.

Yes, the oil companies gave the percentage Gaddafi demanded, which he then put into his own pocket, giving a pretty much undiclosed portion of it to the people. Overthrowing Gaddafi doesn't mean that the government has to cease their control of the oil wells. Now they're free to negotiate much better deals, but this time without it feeding state corruption.

As for assassinations, 1980-1987 Gaddafi succeeded in assassinating 25 political opponents OUTSIDE of Libya, in 37 attacks:
http://articles.latimes.com/1987-07-18/news/mn-604_1_amnesty-international
"Gaddafi and his revolutionary guard went public in March 1980 declaring that “the masses have the right to liquidate their enemies at home and abroad”."
http://english.libya.tv/2011/04/16/gaddafi’s-history-of-intimidation-and-assassinations/
There is also a list there of all the victims.
After this he continued harassing his own people in pretty much the same way.

Democratic rights does not mean american rights. In fact America has a poor record of democratic rights.

Gaddafi is a much, MUCH bigger evil than al-Qaeda has ever been. Al-Qaeda is pretty much muslim Hells Angels. That America appointed this group as its number one enemy, has been laughable. That America had to completely flatten entire cities in its war against this gang, is both hilarous and tragic.

So what you're worried about here, is not whether or not Libya gets a democratic society, but whether or not the people would want to vote for "the right party" or not. Personally I like Hamas. Anyone who hates Israels theocracy is okay by me, and there is nothing better that a militant organisation can do, than to get political instead. If Al-Qaeda would win an election somewhere, and run a country with the honest support of its people, then I'd applaud it. No matter who wins, at least the people has a choice.

>Technically, Somali has democratic government. In fact, the legitimate democratic government controls less than a half of just one city.
Are you saying that a democracy will be more powerless than Gaddafis rule?

gaddafi never wanted war huh? Same with hitler.

>>50
Did you miss the rebels genociding and running all the filthy niggers out of libya?

>>47
Not really, I was simply stating my opinions on the subject and didn't realize it was an ego contest for you. My apology, kind sir.

Of course, my statements were still true.

>>50
Gaddafi was a pretty typical Muslim tyrant. His replacement will be just as bad. Not much changes in the Middle East.

Arab Spring...lol!

Current reports are that members of Gaddafi's household have either been captured, or have fled in a motorcade to Algeria. Britain is back to its old tricks of freezing his overseas assets.

>>54
1. Never be related to anyone ruling a country.
2. Never invest in english or american businesses. (Their governments might decide to rob you.)

>>55
They'll only rob you if they have an excuse, otherwise they won't bother rocking the boat and sapping investor confidence.

Most investors are not psychopathic dictators falling from grace so they have no reason to fear having their assets frozen.

>>56
Any rich enough person can be painted black and have their asets frozen. It's not just world leaders. America and England has now become so poor that they are eager to rob anyone in this way.

>>57
Obviously you don't live in the West, since what you describe is diametrically opposed to current practice. The rich have all the cards are playing those as hard as they can. The poor and the masses have no power.

>>58
That is true as well: The rich rob the poor, and the state robs the rich.

>>59
The state is the rich, so they don't rob themselves. When will you learn?

So Gadhafi wants his supporters to fight on, huh.  That's him - - always fighting to the last drop of someone else's blood.

>>58
Don't forget the lobbyists, special interests, the unions, the media, 2 corrupt political parties and any man willing to vote with a gun.

There is a lot of power all over the place.

>>60
I think I need to see some ID here. I'm 34. How old are you?

>>61
Are you surprised?  Remember this from March?
>We shall implement a ceasefire as soon as we've finished shooting at these civilians.

Amazingly a lot of soldiers died in "Afganistan" when the "rebels" were taking over Tripoli...
And who has profit from Iraqi oil resources now? (you think it's going to be different in Libya?)...NATO is bringing chaos and power to the muslim brotherhood.

>>65
Breaking news: soldiers die in war.

I can't believe the Gaddafi fanboy doesn't think he had death squads.

Why are you like holocaust deniers, creationists and 9/11 truthers Gaddafi fanboy? Even the most biased estimates in you favor that stay within reason show Gaddafi to be a regular tyrant who used force to suppress political opposition even if he wasn't a fan of mass purges which sweep up innocents and persecute minorities.

>>Breaking geographic news: Afganistan is not in Tripoli...

>>67 Why the "rebels" are killing blacks? Is that a part of democracy american-style?
And why Libya Ex-Islamic terrorist heads Tripoli Military Council?

When fascism comes to America it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross. — Sinclair Lewis 1935

Does not USA have death squads? Is it only ok for tyrants to protect 99% of country's people against 1% of extremists? And please, why Gaddafi opresses someone when he isn't a politician himself. Everybody knows that. And of course, if opposition was strong enough, there weren't any Lybian war longer than a week.

>>69
Because Gaddafi started recruiting many black Africans in his militias after he gave up on pan-Arabism and embraced pan-Africanism.

>>69
>Why the "rebels" are killing blacks?
Do you have a source for this that isn't Libyan TV?

g

g

fg

>>73
It's been mentioned on several news sources. They've been accused of a lot of different things including of mass rapes and such.

However, this is still Africa so it's not much of a surprise.

http://www.counterpunch.org/2011/07/27/lies-of-the-libyan-war/

Lies of the Libyan War
by THOMAS MOUNTAIN

As exposed here on CounterPunch the lies used to justify the NATO war against Libya have surpassed those created to justify the invasion of Iraq. Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch both had honest observers on the ground for months following the rebellion in eastern Libya and both have repudiated every major charge used to justify the NATO war on Libya.

According to the Amnesty observer, who is fluent in Arabic, there is not one confirmed instance of rape by the pro-Gadaffi fighters, not even a doctor who knew of one. All the Viagra mass rape stories were fabrications.

Amnesty could not verify a single "African mercenary" fighting for Gaddafi story, and the highly charged international satellite television accounts of African mercenaries raping women that were used to panic much of the eastern Libyan population into fleeing their homes were fabrications.

There were no confirmed accounts of helicopter gun ships attacking civilians and no jet fighters bombing people which completely invalidates any justification for the No-Fly Zone inSecurity Council resolution used as an excuse for NATO to launch its attacks on Libya.

After three months on the ground in rebel controlled territory, the Amnesty investigator could only confirm 110 deaths in Benghazi which included Gadaffi supporters.
Only 110 dead in Benghazi? Wait a minute, we were told thousands had died there, ten thousand even. No, only 110 lost their lives including pro-government people.

No rapes, no African mercenaries, no helicopter gun ships or bombers, and only 110 ten deaths prior to the launch of the NATO bombing campaign, every reason was based on a lie.

Today according to the Libyan Red Crescent Society, over 1,100 civilians have been killed by NATO bombs including over 400 women and children. Over 6,000 Libyan civilians have been injured or wounded by the bombing, many very seriously.

Compared to the war on Iraq, these numbers are tiny, but the reasons for the Libyan war have no merit in any form.
Saddam Hussein was evil, he invaded his neighbors in wars that killed up to a million. He used Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD’s) in the form of poison gas on both his neighbors and his own people, killing tens of thousands. He was brutal and corrupt and when American tanks rolled into Iraq the Iraqi people refused to fight for him, simply put their weapons down and went home.

Libya under Col. Gadaffi hasn’t invaded their neighbors. Gadaffi never used WMD’s on anyone, let alone his own people. As for Gadaffi being brutal, in Libya’s neighbor Algeria, the Algerian military fought a counterinsurgency for a decade in the 1990′s that witnessed the deaths of some 200,000 Algerians. Now that is brutal and nothing anywhere near this has happened in Libya.

In Egypt and Tunisia, western puppets like Mubarak and Ben Ali had almost no support amongst their people with few if anyone willing to fight and die to defend them.

The majority of the Libyan people are rallying behind the Libyan government and "the leader", Muammar Gadaffi, with over one million people demonstrating in support on July 1 in Tripoli, the capital of Libya. Thousands of Libyan youth are on the front lines fighting the rebels and despite thousands of NATO air strikes authentic journalists on the ground in western Libya report their morale remains high.

In Egypt the popular explosion that resulted in the Army seizing power from Mubarak began in the very poorest neighborhoods in Cairo and other Egyptian cities where the price of basic food items like bread, sugar and cooking oil had skyrocketed and lead to widespread hunger. In many parts of Egypt’s poor neighborhoods gasoline/benzene is easier to find then clean drinking water. Medical care and education is only for those with the money to pay for it. Life for the people of Tunisia is not that much better.

In contrast, the Libyan people have the longest life expectancy in the Arab world. The Libyan people have the best, free public health system in the Arab world. The Libyan people have the best, free public education system in the Arab world. Most Libyan families own their own home and most Libyan families own their own automobile. Libya is so much better off then its neighbors every year tens of thousands of Egyptians and Tunisians migrated to Libya to earn money to feed their families, doing the dirty work the Libyan people refused to do.

When it comes to how Gadaffi oversaw a dramatic rise in the standard of living for the Libyan people despite decades of UN inSecurity Council sanctions against the Libyan economy honest observers acknowledge that Gadaffi stands head and shoulders above the kings, sheiks, emirs and various dictators who rule the rest of the Arab world.

So why did NATO launch this war against Libya?

First of all Gadaffi was on the verge of creating a new banking system in Africa that was going to put the IMF, World Bank and assorted other western banksters out of business in Africa. No more predatory western loans used to cripple African economies, instead a $42 billion dollar African Investment Bank would be supplying major loans at little or even zero interest rates.

LIbya has funded major infrastructure projects across Africa that have begun to link up African economies and break the perpetual dependency on the western countries for imports have been taking place. Here in Eritrea the new road connecting Eritrea and Sudan is just one small example.

What seem to have finally tipped the balance in favor of direct western military intervention was the reported demand by Gadaffi that the USA oil companies who have long been major players in the Libyan petroleum industry were going to have to compensate Libya to the tune of tens of billions of dollars for the damage done to the Libyan economy by the USA instigated "Lockerbie Bombing" sanctions imposed by the UN inSecurity Council throughout the 1990′s into early 2000′s. This is based on the unearthing of evidence that the CIA paid millions of dollars to witnesses in the Lockerbie Bombing trial to change their stories to implicate Libya which was used as the basis for the very damaging UN sanctions against Libya. The government of the USA lied and damaged Libya so the USA oil companies were going to have to pay up to cover the cost of their governments actions. Not hard to see why Gadaffi had to go isn’t it?

Add the fact that Gadaffi had signaled clearly that he saw both Libya’s and Africa’s future economic development linked more to China and Russia rather than the west and it was just a matter of time before the CIA’s contingency plan to overthrow the Libyan government was put on the front burner.

NATO’s war against Libya has much more in common with NATO’s Kosovo war against Serbia. But one still cannot compare Gadaffi to Saddam or even the much smaller time criminals in the Serbian leadership. The Libyan War lies are worse than Iraq.

>>78
Oh, look, another so-called "reporter" making shit up to make a point.

>>79
>so-called "reporter"
>THOMAS MOUNTAIN
Err... this guy is a quite known and respected journalist in the USA.

>>80
>Thomas C. Mountain, the last white man living in Eritrea, was in a former life, educator, activist and alternative medicine practitioner in the USA.
Sure sounds like he's reliable, and not in any way whatsoever a crank with an agenda to push.

>>81
alternative medicine
So he's one of those morons that believes in homeopathy? If not an agenda, just an unsuccessful crank.

I heard there was this woman in Libya who was telling us stuff that was completely contradicting the party line.  She was the *only* English-speaking reporter saying those things.  Then it turned out that she was a political activist who was there at the invite of Iran's state broadcaster.  She disappeared for a few days - I guess she fled the country after walking the streets which she claimed weren't full of rebels with guns.

>>82
Despite his opinion on medicine, he wrote articles before Libyan conflict and no one accused him of being agenda or crank that is incompetent as a journalist

Gaddafi, having accomplished his “socialist Jamahiriya revolution”, antagonized the majority of Persian Gulf monarchies:
 – He overthrew the monarchy, which kings and emirs of the Gulf always bear in mind;
 – He has established a secular regime of “Islamic socialism” and has shown the entire Arab East that this system in the context of large resource rents provides a much higher level and quality of life for the
general public than that which they have at home; 
– From the standpoint of these achievements, he not only encouraged other Arab (and more generally Islamic) peoples to effect revolution and live according to his Green Book, but also actively interfered in their internal politics, as well as increased his influence in the Arab League and Organization of Islamic Conference;
 – He effectively dislodged the Saudi royal house from its position in many regions of Africa, replacing it with his influence both directly and through the  African Union created with much of his efforts. A number of Western leaders have long-standing “historical accounts” with Gaddafi. The U.S. and Britain remember the decisive expulsion of their military bases from Libya after “Gaddafi’s revolution”, as well as the nationalization of their oil equity. France has clashed with Gaddafi for many years over influence in French-speaking Africa; moreover, sometimes these clashes have escalated into direct armed conflict (as in Chad). Italy has always been afraid of unexpected twists in Gaddafi’s policy, which could at any moment “flood” the country with a stream of illegal migrants from Africa. Not the least role in the West’s animosity towards Gaddafi was played by the consequences of his policy of “exporting revolution”, in the course of which he has supported anti-governmental movements worldwide and which has also facilitated the departure of his radical Islamist opponents to “hot spots” (farther away from Libya). And although the role of Gaddafi himself or his intelligence services in the terrorist attack in Berlin, as well as the bombings of American and French aircraft has never been definitely proven, it was precisely these enumerated developments that became the primary motives for the introduction of U.N. sanctions against Libya in 1992, as “the main sponsor of global terrorism”. For Western countries, and most of all for the U.S., Gaddafi was unacceptable both for the reason that he has shown the whole world an example of successful “Arab socialism” and because he has shown extreme economic and political independence. Libya has had no foreign debts and there has been no strata of prominent, powerful oligarchs, who may be influenced by the threat of  confiscation of their accounts in Western banks (ostensibly the “assets of the Qaddafi family” are frozen in the West – in reality these assets are principally those of the state National Oil Corporation and state investment funds). Mitigation of Gaddafi’s policy, his acceptance of Libya’s responsibility (but not guilt) for the above-mentioned terrorist attacks, as well as the payment of compensation to their victims – were important grounds, but not the main reason for withdrawing the international sanctions against Libya in 2004. According to experts, one of the conditions for withdrawing sanctions was a demand from the U.S. and EU countries for the provision of wider access to international oil companies in Libya.

Interesting article.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/717b69ea-dc87-11e0-8654-00144feabdc0.html

In June 2003 Gaddafi announced at the nationwide congress a new path for the country towards “popular capitalism” and the beginning of the privatization of the oil and gas industry. It is exactly at that point that Gaddafi signed an agreement with Italy on joint control over illegal immigration. Beginning in 2005, approximately 40 foreign oil companies have returned to work in Libya (primarily under the Production-Sharing Agreements). The amount of “oil rent” (which was previously almost completely accumulated in the national budget and the state investment funds) began to fall as a result. And in 2009, feeling the risk of a collapse of revenues during the crisis and lower oil prices, Gaddafi expressed his reluctance to privatize the National Oil Corporation (on which oil companies, primarily from France, Italy and the U.S.A. had very much been counting). Subsequently, Gaddafi said that agreements with foreign companies for the “equal” distribution of oil produced by them in Libya was an injustice to the Libyan people and that it would be correct to reduce the share of such companies to 10-15%. Libya possesses the largest proven oil reserves in Africa (50 billion bbl.) and estimates of its oil reserves are about 100 billion barrels on land and about the same on the shelf (moreover, not more than 30% of the country has been explored). Therefore, these decisions of Gaddafi’s were a very painful blow to the interests of foreign oil “grandees”, especially given the fact that the bulk of Libya’s oil is the most valuable – the light, low sulfur type requiring minimal expenditure on processing.  In addition, the PRC has recently shown increasing activity in obtaining contracts for Libyan oil fields, as well as participation in other Libyan infrastructure and industrial projects. In particular, China’s largest oil corporation CNPC has received a number of promising oil sites in the country for exploration and development. Before the current war, more than 30 thousand Chinese experts and workers had worked in Libya (after the war began, almost all of them were evacuated from the country). The Libyan “Chinese” factor –against the backdrop of the higher activity of Chinese businesses in Africa in general – is considered by knowledgeable experts to be one of the major reasons for the organization of the war against Gaddafi by Western nations. http://www.presstv.ir/detail/176776.html

>>85
You forgot the part where he brutally suppressed his rivals, imprisoned anyone who expressed dissent without trial, and when the prison got a bit full had some inmates killed.

>>87
>presstv
Source or it didn't happen.

>>88
That normal for any Muslim nation.

>>87
the video didn't happen? because only american sources are truthful...

>>90
>His writings frequently appear on OpEdNews, Prisonplanet.com, Antiwar.com, VDARE.com. LewRockwell.com, CounterPunch, and the American Free Press.
Yet another writer who clearly isn't in any way a crank with an agenda to push.

>>85 >>88
The population of the country is predominantly Arab, but 8% consider themselves Berbers, and up to 3% – Tuaregs. Moreover, the Arabs, Berbers, and Tuaregs are still very firmly entrenched in the tribal structure of society (there are over 140 tribes in the country, and in each, as a rule, there are several tribal clans). Loyalty to the clan and tribe both in the Middle Ages and now is valued more (with the exception of the narrow strata of the modernized elite) than loyalty to any rulers –sultan, caliph, king, president, leader of the nation, and so on. Right up until the era of independence (1951), tribes in Libya were effectively autonomous political, military, and economic units with the relative territory (“watan”) that was secured for each of them. The majority of the population has always led (and to a large degree, still does lead) a nomadic Bedouin lifestyle. The urbanization that has taken place (primarily under Gaddafi) has weakened, but not abolished the system of clan and tribal identification. http://www.stratfor.com/node/21463/archive
The main religion is Islam, in the particular form of the Sufi order Senussi, which was founded by  Muhammad Ali as-Senussi (from an Arab clan descended from the Prophet Muhammad through the line of his daughter Fatima) in Mecca in 1837, and who “hybridized” Sufism and Wahhabism in the new order with the following objectives:
– the revival of the pure faith and the practice of Islam in accordance with the teachings of the Prophet;
– the unification of all Sufi tariqas into a single order;
– propaganda of Islam on the periphery of the Arab world.
The first Senussi religious center (zawiya) was established in Libya 1843 in al-Bayda (Cyrenaica) and subsequently played a decisive role in the unification of the constantly feuding Libyan tribes. Each tribe created its own zawiya and in this manner, it led the tribes through the lodge members of Senussi under a common “denominational umbrella”. Soon Senussism became a single theocratic banner in the fight for Libya’s independence from the Turks and the Italians. After the receipt of independence, the first king of the Federal Kingdom of Cyrenaica, Tripolitania, and Fezzan (present-day Libya, which became a unitary state only in 1963) became the religious, military and political leader of Senussiism and the Emir of Cyrenaica Idris as-Senussi (great-grandson of the founder of the Order of the tribe Kharaba), who relied upon the elite of the leading clans of Cyrenaica.
After  huge oil reserves were discovered in Libya in the late 1950s, the autocratic domination of Cyrenaica lead to the rapid deterioration of relations between King Idris I and the sheikhs and even with the lodge members of the majority of tribes and in particular with the tribes of Tripolitania and Fezzan, which were deprived of their rightful share of oil revenues. It was this factor, along with the dissatisfaction with the presence of U.S. and British military bases in Libya, which determined the broad elite and social base of Gaddafi’s military coup that took place in 1969. On the one hand, Gaddafi brutally suppressed the resistance of the Senussi elite (predominantly from the Kharaba tribe) as well as of the elite of the Warfalla, Obeidat, Magarha, and other tribes that were close to King Idris. On the other hand, being from the relatively weak Gaddafi tribe, he had to contain and stabilize his power by relying on both the elite of the leading tribes and on the Senussi lodge members. The main tool of his policy became the relatively equitable division of oil revenues among tribes and also attempts to “torpedo” the tribal structure of society with ideas of national unity and pan-Arabism. Gaddafi’s political course became a specific form of “leveling” socialism, economically based on oil revenue rents, plus a legal system based on the rules of the sharia. At first, Gaddafi also sought to intermarry with the Senussis (which for Bedouin society is practically the equivalent of “to make peace with”). His first wife Fatiha Khaled, from the marriage with whom his son Muhammad was born, was from the clan of as-Senussi. But this marriage soon fell apart, and Gaddafi’s second wife became Safia Farkash, from the large Obeidat tribe. Furthermore, Gaddafi quickly incorporated large groups from the elite of the most influential Libyan tribes into power, including the Cyrenaica tribes. However, already in the first half of the 1970s, an intertribal massacre and revolt began in Libya, fueled by tribal sheikhs and Senussi zawiyas. Gaddafi brutally suppressed the revolts, confiscated a part of the Kharaba clans’ land, and distributed it to other tribes . The majority of the Senussi Kharaba elite, and also a part of the elite of other tribes who participated in the uprisings, fled the country (to London, Egypt, Paris, and so on). It was after this that Gaddafi began to write his Green Book, which advocates a “third way” between capitalism and socialism as a system of direct popular rule (Jamahiriya) and also a fundamental transformation of the entire system of government. Upon proclamation of the Libyan Jamahiriya in 1977, the Revolutionary Command Council was created instead of a Defense Ministry and a General Staff, and the army was divided into “resistance forces” and “security forces”. At the same time, universal compulsory military service was introduced, women were allowed to be called up for military service, and also the armies of the Local People’s Militia were created, and they included a large part of the country’s population. The structure of political power turned out to be presented as a system of directly elected people’s congresses, as well as people’s and revolutionary committees. Gaddafi absolved himself from all official posts, leaving himself unofficially in the position of “Leader of the Revolution” and supreme commander. In the context of a tribal society, this power structure could be maintained only in the absence of strong grassroots protest. Gaddafi ensured this with rather equitable distribution of revenues from the nationalized oil industry, whose assets were concentrated in the National Petroleum Corporation, and also through the creation (almost along the lines of Norway’s template) of large foreign investment funds that make a profit from oil windfalls on account of investment in several dozen developed and developing countries of the world. As a result, Libya has the highest human development index level in Africa, free education and healthcare, no unemployment, full literacy, and one of the longest life expectancies in Africa.  (The Global Competitiveness Report 2008-2009, by World Economic Forum)

>>92
Facts, on my /newpol/?

Apart from that Gaddafi managed to solve an extremely acute problem for this part of Africa: supplying fresh water to the communities. He spent more than $25 billion in budgetary funds to arrange the extraction of fresh water from the subterranean levels in the Sahara desert and its transportation through a pipeline network that stretches around 4,000 kilometers. However, a part of the tribal elite never resigned themselves to Gaddafi’s leadership – the leadership of a Bedouin from a tribe that was far from being the most influential. During his reign, there have been several coup attempts and dozens of assassination attempts, the initiators and perpetrators of which Gaddafi has dealt with brutally. It was this exponential brutality (and also the fact that Gaddafi had intermarried through his wife and children with the elite of the majority of the most influential tribes and brought representatives of these tribes into the highest levels of government) that has ensured, in the context of Libyan society’s tribal specificity, the recognition of Gaddafi as the real “leader of the nation”. Another of Gaddafi’s major problems all these years has been radical Islamic opposition, which has had the strongest influence in the coastal area of Cyrenaica near Egypt (Barka region), including in the former Senussi lands of the Kharaba tribes (Tobruk in the Benghazi zone).  Thus, on March 16, 2011, telegrams of the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli dating from 2008 were disclosed on the website WikiLeaks. They reported that the Benghazi region was one of the main ideological and political bases of al-Qaeda, and also one of the main regions for the “world export” of suicide bombers and jihadists . On March 25th, the U.S. press published excerpts from an analytical report by the American military academy West Point, composed in 2007 on the basis of personal data from 600 jihadists captured in Iraq. http://www.ctc.usma.edu/?s=foreign+fighter&type=all&program=all&order=desc
It was found that 41% of them were from Saudi Arabia, and in second place was the Libyan region of Benghazi- Darnah-Tobruk: the “heart” of the current uprising against Gaddafi. Moreover, 52 mujahedin arrived in Iraq from tiny Darnah, and from huge Riyadh.  The West Point report emphasizes that “Benghazi and Darnah were the center of a large Islamist revolt against Gaddafi in the mid-90’s and are a pivotal base for the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG), which in 2007 formally merged with al-Qaida”. In connection with this, it should be noted that already in February 19, 2011, the press had reported the creation of “Islamic emirates” in this zone of Cyrenaica and in Darnah and al-Bayda. Moreover, in Darnah the emirate was founded by the former Guantanamo detainee Abdelkarim al-Hasadi, and on February 24th, al-Qaeda announced support for the opposition in Libya and promised “to do everything possible to assist it”.

Gaddafi was a murderous asshole. However, he wasn't all that bad as compared to the usual scum that runs the middle east.

Most of the good things Gaddafi did were motivated by self-interest, if he couldn't provide water for his population then he would drive them to rebel since they would die either way.

>>96
>Most of the good things Gaddafi did were motivated by self-interest
You have just described an average politician.

>>97
Exactly, now imagine what it would be like if a politician had the power to rule by decree.

This is what it has been like in Libya for the past 4 decades.

http://www.afro.com/sections/news/national/story.htm?storyid=72369

Former U.S. Congressman Walter Fauntroy, who recently returned from a self-sanctioned peace mission to Libya, said he went into hiding for about a month in Libya after witnessing horrifying events in Libya's bloody civil war -- a war that Fauntroy claims is backed by European forces.

Fauntroy's sudden disappearance prompted rumors and news reports that he had been killed.

In an interview inside his Northwest D.C. home last week, the noted civil rights leader, told the Afro that he watched French and Danish troops storm small villages late at night beheading, maiming and killing rebels and loyalists to show them who was in control.

"'What the hell' I'm thinking to myself. I'm getting out of here. So I went in hiding," Fauntroy said.

The rebels told Fauntroy they had been told by the European forces to stay inside. According to Fauntroy, the European forces would tell the rebels, "'Look at what you did.' In other words, the French and Danish were ordering the bombings and killings, and giving credit to the rebels.

"The truth about all this will come out later," Fauntroy said.

While in Libya, the former congressman also said he sat down with Libyan leader Moammar Gaddafi for a one-on-one conversation. Gaddafi has ruled Libya since 1969, when he seized power in a military coup.

Fauntroy said he spoke with Gaddafi in person and that Gaddafi assured him that if he survived these attacks, the mission to unite African countries would continue.

"Contrary to what is being reported in the press, from what I heard and observed, more than 90 percent of the Libyan people love Gaddafi," Fauntroy said. "We believe the true mission of the attacks on Gaddafi is to prevent all efforts by African leaders to stop the recolonization of Africa."

Several months ago, Gaddafi's leadership faced its biggest challenge. In February, a radical protest movement called the Arab Spring spread across Libya. When Gaddafi responded by dispatching military and plainclothes paramilitary to the streets to attack demonstrators, it turned into a civil war with the assistance of NATO and the United Nations.

Fauntroy's account could not be immediately verified by the Afro and the U.S. State Department has not substantiated Fauntroy's version of events. Fauntroy was not acting as an official representative of the U.S. in Libya. He returned to Washington, D.C. on Aug. 31.

When rumors spread about Fauntroy being killed he went underground, he told the Afro in an interview. Fauntroy said for more than a month he decided not to contact his family but to continue the mission to speak with African spiritual leaders about a movement to unify Africa despite the Arab uprisings.

"I'm still here," Fauntroy said, pointing to several parts of his body. "I've got all my fingers and toes. I'm extremely lucky to be here."

After blogs and rumors reported Fauntroy had been killed, the congressional office of Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC) announced on Aug. 24, that she had been in touch with authorities who confirmed Fauntroy was safely in the care of the International Committee of the Red Cross.

Inside his home, Fauntroy pulled out several memoirs and notebooks to explain why he traveled to Libya at a time when it was going through civil unrest.

"This recent trip to Libya was part of a continuous mission that started under Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. when he gave me orders to join four African countries on the continent with four in the African Diaspora to restore the continent to its pre-colonial status," Fauntroy said.

"We want Africa to be the breadbasket of the world," he said. "Currently, all the major roads in every country throughout Africa lead to ports that take its natural resources and wealth outside the continent to be sold to the European markets."

>>98
Exactly. The most prosperous country in Africa.

>>100
South Africa would like a word with you.

>>101
South Africa....rape capital of the world.

LIFG (aka Al-Jama’a al-Islamiyyah al-Muqatilah  (JIM), aka Libyan Jamaat), which was established in 1995,  which has declared as its goal the overthrow of Gaddafi and the establishment of an Islamic state in Libya, has carried out a number of major terrorist attacks in the country. In 1996, a military operation was conducted against the JIM in the mountainous regions of Libya, in which up to 10 thousand troops were involved. JIM Mujahedin have created infrastructure in different European and Arab countries, as well as forged links with Islamic radicals in other countries of the Maghreb. During the civil war in Algeria, JIM closely cooperated with the Salafi Group for Preaching and Combat (which is al-Qaeda in the Maghreb). In 2001, the JIM Mujahedin actively participated in military actions in Afghanistan. The spiritual leader of JIM Al-Saadi received the title of “Sheikh of the Arabs in Afghanistan” from the chief of the head of the Taliban, Mullah Omar. In Libya, JIM has created “sleeper cells” all these years. Realizing the threat posed by JIM, the government began talks with them (Gaddafi’s eldest son, Saif al-Islam, was in charge). The authorities guaranteed the organization’s activists latitude in exchange for disavowal of armed hostilities. In September 2009, JIM published a 417-page document criticizing the ideology of al-Qaida and presenting reasons for the abandonment of fighting with Gaddafi’s regime. Moreover, beginning in 2006, around 300 previously arrested members of the JIM were released from prison. Experts point out that in the new political situation; these are quite capable of reviving their “dormant underground”. The Muslim Brotherhood had low-level activities in Libya until recently. In mid-March, the world’s media reported that Egypt (moreover, the actors in the operations were not named) was supplying weapons to the Libyan rebels, thereby circumventing the UN embargo. WSJ 18.03.2011
However, military sources indicate that it is this organization that has ferried weapons and volunteers from Egypt into Cyrenaica since the early days of the “new Libyan revolution”. Finally, it should be mentioned that the spiritual leader of the Muslim Brotherhood, Yusuf al-Qaradawi, having returned to Egypt in late February after half a century of exile, immediately called for the killing of Qaddafi “for the brutal massacre of demonstrators”. 
Experts report that one of the main “external” organizers of the current “uprising” in Libya was the National Conference for the Libyan Opposition, established in London in June 2005 and composed of several groups of exiled members of the royal family, tribal leaders, and former functionaries of the Libyan government. The most influential of these groups is the Muslim Brotherhood, as well as the Libyan Constitutional Union, headed by Crown Prince Muhammad as-Senussi, nephew of King Idris, deposed in 1969. stratfor.com/node/21463/archive
It is this London opposition, noted above, that led the “preliminary talks” for rebellion with leaders of Libyan tribal clans, and it was this opposition which imported a huge number of the flags of King Idris’ monarchy (black, red and green with a white crescent and star) into Libya, under which the “rebels” now march. And it is no coincidence that the current “official” leader of this opposition – former Justice Minister Mustafa Abdul-Jalil, having deserted the Gaddafi camp – comes from the pivotal Senussi Kharaba tribe. Thus, the main political resource of the current uprising against Gaddafi became: firstly, the radical Islamic opposition, integrated with the heirs of the Senussi dynasty; and secondly, some of the sheikhs and lodge members of the tribal elite, who expect to receive a more substantial share of the national “oil export pie” during the course of the redistribution of power. Having promised a piece of this pie to its “grassroots” tribal masses and having provided for the looting of the regional armories established by Gaddafi for the Local People’s Militias, the clan elite procured an “armed people”, which rose up to fight the central government. However, as reported by the media, a significant part of the most powerful weapons from the looted armories did not end up with the “rebels”. They were immediately confiscated (stolen or bought from the leaders of the uprising) by groups of radical Islamists and sent in large quantities across the southern borders of Libya into the remote areas of the Sahel (Chad and Mali), where the regional bases of al-Qaida and a number of other Islamist organizations are located.
Chadian President Idriss Deby reported on March 22nd in an interview with the weekly Jeune Afrique that Islamists of the AQIM have used the looting of military depots in the area of Libyan uprising and taken many weapons, including surface-to-air missiles, and smuggled the rockets into their hiding places in the Ténéré in the central part of the Sahara. Sources in the security systems of Mali and Niger confirm that the Maghreb al-Qaeda has come into possession of Libyan heavy weapons.
Moreover, some experts do not exclude that al-Qaida could have obtained not only heavy weapons and air defense systems from the looted armories in the eastern and southern part of Libya (which has already been established by the intelligence services of neighboring countries), but also the chemical weapons components possessed by Gaddafi’s regime.

>>102
South Africa - the most prosperous country in all of Africa.
South Africa - the country where all women are raped all the time.
All women are raped
Most prosperous
rape
prosper
Think about it.
/newpol/ - solves world problems.

South Africa was a prosperous industrialized First World nation under Apartheid.  Since 1996, the country has been ethnically cleansed of Whitey almost as thoroughly as Rhodesi--er, I mean, Zimbabwe.

South Africa is now indistinguishable from any other African failed state full of nigpanzees, and it took less than fifteen years.

Oh look, it's Gaddafi's cocksuckers coming out of the woodwork. Let me tell you something about your so-called hero.

He wants to control Africa, so he pays African leaders to call him "The King of Kings". He spends most of the oil money on other African countries instead of his own people. That's why he's popular among the African countries but not his own.

He is a ruthless dictator who tramples on liberty, freedom of speech and women's rights. No democracy whatsoever. Internet access is heavily censored and monitored.

He and his family live in luxury while 1/3 of the population live below the poverty line.
He has a harem of female bodyguards, maids, and nurses who he regularly rapes and abuses.
He hires black mercenaries who rape, torture, and kill Libyans.
He assassinates and hangs political dissidents and broadcasts their executions on national TV.
He tortures prisoners and then kill them using bombs and machine guns when rebels are about to enter Tripoli.
He funds black and muslim dictators, assassins, and terrorist organizations all around the world.
He has nuclear and chemical WMDs and has used them on neighboring countries.
He wants to destabilize Europe with a new currency and flood Europe with black and muslim immigrants and terrorists.
He and his family drink wine despite being muslims.
He has a collection of gay porno DVDs and an album of Condoleezza Rice.
He is a known paedophile who rapes his own grandchildren. Just look at any picture or video of him with children to see how sick he is.

These are all in the news and all over the Internet. You can look it up yourself.

>>106
I wonder why you bother to begin by saying truthful things, and then just resort to lies pulled out of your african ass toward the end. We're NOT africans - we know bullshit when we see it.


"He wants to destabilize Europe with a new currency and flood Europe with black and muslim immigrants and terrorists."

I think you lost me at this point.

"He and his family drink wine despite being muslims."

Ooh, he's not a devout muslim. *sarcasm*


"He has a collection of gay porno DVDs and an album of Condoleezza Rice."

...and yet you say that he rapes his FEMALE bodyguards.


"He is a known paedophile who rapes his own grandchildren. Just look at any picture or video of him with children to see how sick he is."

Do you realize that you are posting this on 4CHAN? Your final argument made him look like an okay guy.

>>106
I think Obama has found a role model at last.

>>106
>He wants to control Africa, so he pays African leaders to call him "The King of Kings"
Not sure if troll or just stupid. The "Sheikh of sheikhs" is what most libyan tribe leaders call him.
>He spends most of the oil money on other African countries instead of his own people.
And yet - Libya is the most prosperous country with the best living conditions in the whole Africa and other countries are extremely poor.
>That's why he's popular among the African countries but not his own.
Read this >>99, for example. 90% of libyan people support Gaddafi.
>He and his family live in luxury while 1/3 of the population live below the poverty line.
Of all the photos that were shown in media - his house isn't that luxurios and Libya isn't that poor. I live in Eastern Europe and I could easily afford that too.
>He is a ruthless dictator who tramples on liberty, freedom of speech and women's rights.
>women's rights
Libya is one of few muslim countries where women actually have rights and are respected, while rebels treat them as subhumans.
>He has a harem of female bodyguards, maids, and nurses who he regularly rapes and abuses.
You know, this statement makes you look completely retarded. What kind of idiot rapes own bodyguards and expects them to do their job well? And yet his bodyguards has prevented 8 attempts of Gaddafi's assasination, which means they are devoutly loyal.
>He hires black mercenaries who rape, torture, and kill Libyans.
What Western mass media calls black mercenaries are merely black-skinned libyan citizens, that are being genocided by rebels.
>He has nuclear and chemical WMDs and has used them on neighboring countries.
Are you sure you aren't you mistaking him with Saddam Hussein?
Your arguments are just getting more and more retarded.

>>109
So much bullshit. Fucking two africans arguing is the worst.

South Africa is the most prosperous country in Africa.

Libya has oil. Even a fraction of this oil revenue is enough to make the country "prosper" in terms of pure living standards for the two thirds that Gaddafi happens to like. "Prosperity" says nothing about actual happiness.

90% of libyan people would support Gaddafi if you put a gun to their heads, and mercilessly fed them false propaganda, which Gaddafi has done for a long time with his reign of state terror.

Womens rights in Libya was something deliberately used to gain political support. It's not hard for women to have SOME semblence of equal rights, when men don't have rights either.

The term "black mercenaries" means "COVERT mercenaries", and denying that there's been regular assassinations going on is kind of like denying the Holocaust. Their activities even abroad, has been thoroughly documented. Read post >>50 for a list of those victims (before the involved countries started to secretly cooperate with Libya, sending them people who criticized Gaddafi, so that these people could be murdered without raising headlines).

>>110
>South Africa is the most prosperous country in Africa.
It *was*
>Even a fraction of this oil revenue is enough to make the country "prosper"
No, oil itself is one thing. Managing and distributing profits from oil is another.
>90% of libyan people would support Gaddafi if you put a gun to their heads
Exactly, when rebels and NATO are putting guns to their heads...
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/06/07/going-rogue-natos-war-crimes-in-libya/
>Womens rights in Libya was something deliberately used to gain political support. It's not hard for women to have SOME semblence of equal rights, when men don't have rights either.
Hurr durr
>The term "black mercenaries" means "COVERT mercenaries"
Read post >>25 about these "black mercenaries"

It's horrible that it won't stop with Gaddafi dead or in exile, because we have all these pro-Gaddafi supporters to deal with as well, somehow still funded and organized to keep spreading propaganda and provoking people to rise up against "NATO agressions" via YouTube and Facebook. Some of these people (like YouTube user hhhpets) are apparently even doing it from within the US. Propaganda is something that Gaddafi relied on for power, so I expect more of these bizarre "Gaddafi was such a nice guy, and he was kind of everybody." propaganda threads. While we're at it, we haven't seen "Hitler was such a nice guy" threads in a while.

>>110
Actually, in this case, "black mercenaries" means niggers.  From Chad, mainly.  The Chadians themselves say they were there as refugees from the civil war come to make a new life for themselves, others are suggesting they're just saying that to avoid potential reprisals from both sides given that if they were merc they'd have been used to suppress opposition and by speaking out thy'd anger the loyalists in the area.

We've seen footage of the Chadians being attacked, but this has come from Libyan state TV who claim it is the rebels.  If what ome have said about the purpose of them being there is true, then it's understandably revenge, but it may also be false-flag propaganda by the old regime trying to paint the rebels in a bad light.  Normally, they say that the first casualty in war is the truth, but in Libya that died in the 1960s.

>>111
>>Even a fraction of this oil revenue is enough to make the country "prosper"
>No, oil itself is one thing. Managing and distributing profits from oil is another.
Even a fraction of this oil revenue is enough to make the country "prosper". (Gaddafi keeps the rest.)

>>90% of libyan people would support Gaddafi if you put a gun to their heads
>Exactly, when rebels and NATO are putting guns to their heads...
Although NATO isn't above guilt, you can't compare Gaddafi executing people in peacetime with the way that remaining people are being treated in warzones.
Here are some basic rules for a warzone: Take care of the friendlies, protect the neutral, and shoot the enemies. Sealing neutral people inside their homes is actually standard procedure when you can't evacuate them. Special ops debriefing reports often read "They were making too much noise, so we knocked them unconscious and put them in a cupboard.". This goes for high up politicians they're there to rescue or protect as well, because unconscious people in cupboards don't distract you into getting shot. If you're saying that you're NOT willing to stay out of the fighting and will NOT side with NATO, then you're a hostile, and then you're just one hidden gun away from shooting at them, so unless they have the time for it, they're going to shoot you in self-defence.

Speaking of massacres, I hear Gaddafi has given orders to execute tens of thousands of prisoners:
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/08/29/more-gaddafi-horrors-exposed/


>Read post >>25 about these "black mercenaries"

That post is about a random colored Gaddafi-supporter who happens to be colored, which is something entirely different, and you'd have to be a moron to confuse the two definitions of "black".

>>114
>Even a fraction of this oil revenue is enough to make the country "prosper".
Professional economist on my 4chan?
>(Gaddafi keeps the rest.)
One post you say that "he spends most of the oil money on other African countries", the other - that he keeps them. Fail.
>Although NATO isn't above guilt, you can't compare Gaddafi executing people in peacetime with the way that remaining people are being treated in warzones.
hurr durr
>Speaking of massacres, I hear Gaddafi has given orders to execute tens of thousands of prisoners:
This article makes as much sense as the news that Gaddafi raped own bodyguards. Hurr, blame the dictator of committing irrational evil deeds (that are more appropriate for islamist rebels to commit), because he is evil dictator, durr!

>>115
>>Even a fraction of this oil revenue is enough to make the country "prosper".
>Professional economist on my 4chan?

Among the first basic things you can realize about world economy, is that Africa is a piss-poor continent full of starvation and no resources, while countries with oil are rich.


>>(Gaddafi keeps the rest.)
>One post you say that "he spends most of the oil money on other African countries", the other - that he keeps them. Fail.

I've never said that. That wasn't me.


>>Although NATO isn't above guilt, you can't compare Gaddafi executing people in peacetime with the way that remaining people are being treated in warzones.
>hurr durr

You keep saying that like it's some sort of argument.


>This article makes as much sense as the news that Gaddafi raped own bodyguards. Hurr, blame the dictator of committing irrational evil deeds (that are more appropriate for islamist rebels to commit), because he is evil dictator, durr!

I thought you'd put SOME faith in the articles on that site, as it's the same site that YOU linked to, but I guess that you somehow only fanatically believe in articles portraying Gaddafi as great.

I heard Gaddafi was a bad man, but other than massacring prisoners, shooting mourners at the funeral, sending in the tanks to put down the resulting protests, sanctioning terrorist attacks, violating foreign embassies, abusing his embassies abroad, attempting to poison visiting dignitaries, pretending to live a frugal lifestyle while actually indulging in great luxury, and siphoning off most of the country's oil money for his personal purposes, what has he done wrong?

>>117
Kinda normal for a Muslim nation. The UN sees nothing wrong with that.

Most people here are kids too young to remember all the horrible things Gaddafi did. Take our word for it, kids: Gaddafi was a notorious and ruthless despot. There's no excuse for the horrible things he did. I know you all want to be hip by thinking differently than the establishment in everything, but this time the western countries supported the good guys, and that's all there is to it.

>>1

I wonder if the Nobel people are regretting giving Obama the NPP  now, since he's started a new war?

>>120
They're sociopaths, they don't feel those sorts of things.

>>121
They'd give Hitler and Stalin a NPP if they could.

>>122 Stalin defeated fascism. Dare not compare him with Adolf.

>>123
The Soviet Union under Stalin degenerated into its own special form of fascism where 20 million were effectively wiped out within the first few decades. Governments under Marxist-Lenninist rule are more deadly and dangerous than Hitler's short twelve year rule was (it's all just as totalitarian, even much more so).

>>124
You clearly don't know the subject you are talking about.
The amount of people killed and imprisoned under Stalin's rule was merely 0,38% of the whole population. Compare this way (in percentage) to any other European or Latin American dictator of that century (Francisco Franco, Pinochet, etc.) - and you'll find out that they were much more bloodthirsty.

>>125
You clearly don't know the subject you are talking about.The amount of people killed and imprisoned under Stalin's rule was merely 0,38% of the whole population.So that makes it less bad? Because percentage-wise Stalin killed less people in the former Soviet Union than did Franco and Pinochet? Cute, but that doesn't really refute my argument. Communism has cost more human lives on this planet than has fascism (nearly 100 million), and still to this day, in the 21^st century, people continue to die under its vice grip. This isn't some nutty right-wing conspiracy (I'm a left-of-center leaning social democrat, myself) making this up, it's cold hard facts.

>>125
>>126
I'm told that capitalism kills hundreds of thousands in the US every year.

Or, IOW, arguing over how to interpret body counts is Special Olympics territory - non-trivial numbers of people dying as a result of state policy is bad, regardless of what that policy is.

>>127
non-trivial numbers of people dying as a result of state policy is bad, regardless of what that policy is.
Of course. People, though, really need to stop pretending that communism wasn't as or more dangerous, though.

Guys, you need to understand that we can't measure the AMOUNT of people who was massacred, but WHO was massacred. For instance, would you cry a single tear if we massacred all the trolls in the world?

>>129
For instance, would you cry a single tear if we massacred all the trolls in the world?
As much as people don't like trolls, they do have human rights.

>>129
No, for I would be among them, probably you as well.

>>130
If it's violating human rights that you're worried about, then we can just make an exception for the trolls: Make being a troll illegal and punishable by death. Problem solved.

>>131
Yeah, I would probably be executed even BEFORE the trolls, but still.

>>128
>missing the point completely
Here's your Special Gold

>>126 That's could not possibly be true because the population was growing and if during the WWII 30mil. were killed by the nazis with population before war 150mil.(or so)then by 1960 it was 170mil.
http://www.mariosousa.se/LiesconcerningthehistoryoftheSovietUnion.html
And it's not 70's anymore you need to stop believing those myths that were created during cold war as a part of american propaganda against USSR
http://clogic.eserver.org/2005/furr.html

>>38
>I can buy that Libya was aiming for democracy

Not really. Muslims generally laugh at the idea of democracy. It's almost always a tribal or clan thing with them. As soon as they get away from a dictatorship or monarchy, they let the Islamist take over and it's back to the dark ages all over again.

>>5
>>22
So let me get this straight you're evidence for you're accusation that libya should be invaded, bombed backed to the stone age, have it's assets seized and impoverished by debt and war repriations is that: You say, that wikipiedia says, that the un says, that the international court says, that according to some peices of paper written by the un (some of there actions contradicted this writting) that is an organization created by the usa to legitimize there actions thaat they did some bad stuff.

Now excuse me if I say that this is a very long stretch. Is the fact that the un allso accused him supposed to be proof in of it self? (implying that the un allways tells the truth and is incappable of lying or doing bad things?). Ones evidence should not consist entirely of further accussations unsubstantiated by any evidence whatsoever.

Essentially it is you're word against his honour, and I doubt that would stand up in any fair court as reasonable evidence and you know it.

So if you know and can prove that he has done anything wrong then prove it and I will stfu. If you don't then stop making obsurd claims that no reasonable person will believe.

And please dont insult everyone whom simply states. "what has he done, where is the evidence, why should the people of libya suffer?" in reply to youre wild accussations that you are repeating from the media.

It is the same bullshit everytime, Hear something on TV>Believe it without any proof or evidence whatsoever>Repeat what you heard and then abuse anyone who doesn't automatically believe it like you do.

The point is I am not a stupid prolleface.prollebrains whom believes everything on tv because prolleface is told to by prolle.je-media TM. And if you don't like that then fuck you. But I refuse to believe Ghadaffi or anyone else is a mean bully without evidence, and you can keep you're barbaric mob lynching attitudes to you'reself thank you very much.

And the whole pretext relies on unproven accusations against one man. These people whom speak of democracy have the highest suicide, imprisonment, wealth inequality, unemployment etc..etc.. in the world and the people whom go to the streets to complain are regularly bet to the death. Just ordinary people (the ones left that didnn't commit suicide because of there misserable lifes). Woman per capita and per women in all libya and persia are both higher in university than in usa and much of europe. While europe/usa sends its wealth and jobs overseas, Libya is building domestic wealth. While we are robbed by inflation and our wages decline in real terms, ther'es increases.

And at the end of the day all you self-loathing shit heads can do is resort to name calling on anyone whom doesn't share the jewish views implanted in youre head by the jewish media as a guise to try and hide you're insecurity when people come asking for evidence and you find that you do not actually know why you believe it only that you know beyond a doubt that it is so obviously true, and that theire must be something wrong with us for not realising it.

Well my hope is that some of you braindead drones are rehabilitatable and that we dont have to lose 80% of the population.....

>>136
>resort to name calling on anyone whom doesn't share the jewish views implanted

You seemed almost intelligent up to that point. Then you start stuttering the word Jew and start spitting out insults. You became the very thing you whine about.

Gaddafi is a typical evil Muslim dictator. He's being replaced by scum that will be just as bad. The UN is run by shit heads. Obama and the EU are a hypocrites. Muslims can't even pretend to be human for 5 minutes. Your a typical faggot.

Same old shit.

>>136
Here's the wikipedia article:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muammar_Gaddafi

There are sources within it. If you suspect them to be untrustworthy, by all means, do some reading. It doesn't matter what sources back up my point though. Fucktards like you will just claim it's a conspiracy.

bombed backed to the stone age, have it's assets seized and impoverished by debt and war repriations...
You're an idiot. We're not at war with all of the Libyan people. Just the ones loyal to Gaddafi. Did the US or UN seize Iraq's assets and impose reparations on it after Saddam was ousted? We've devoted a fuck ton of resources to trying to improve Iraq and we will likely do the same in Libya. Also:

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ukpress/article/ALeqM5gof4JOeLrr5AsqSS2zAl4y1RTzUA?docId=N0431701316210229303A

Choke on a cock.

>>135
Aristotle is laughing at the idea of democracy with them. And it has nothing to do with tribal or clan thing (like there is no lobbying in western "democracies").

>>137
Oh I am sorry I just thought you heard it from a jewish media organisation aka one owned by or with a jewish ceo. In which case it would make it a jewish lie. But if non-jews implanted the lie in you I appologise for the confusion. For I assumed by market share you had heard it from one of theire corporations.

Secondly people whom leavy names at people inplace of a non-existent argument are **** douches are they not, if you disagree with that or think it makes me somehow less intelligent, or invalidates any of my points please enlighten me as to the reasoning for such a thing happending.

Thirdly Everyone keeps saying Ghadifii is an evil muslim dictator but they never have any proof. Why should I believe horrible accusations about people with no evidence, and why do you keep restating the same thing when I have clearly said people shouldn't believe every bit of gossip they hear, and should seek evidence first. You state it as though it refutes my point that I see no evidence, from you or anyone claiming he is a bad person.

Calling musslims not even capable of pretending to be humans, then calling me crazy or something for saying something about jews owning alot of media companies.

No you, you are the same old shit, add nothing new to the argument, restate you're points, denounce and call me names. Call muslims non-human......


>>138
>I see wikipiedia. Wikipiedia = reliable source for you?
>Calling easily falsifiable and non-verifiable evidence which gives us no specific information unreliable makes me a fcuktard bigoted fagoot loving nazi????? Because I would imagine that calling a source which isnt reliable unreliable is only reasonable.
>There is no evidence theire is a conspiracy so why would any sane person believe theire is one let alone claim that theire is one.
>namecaller with no argument or information to back it up
>AP/PA says they unfroze assets? Verrify that? And FYI they froze libyan government assets causing financial troubles (not paying bills incurs liability) and now they have given them to the non-elected government that they helped take over libya. That money was the money of the elected government of libya. They *STOLE IT*, then *GAVE IT AWAY*, to a fake non-elected government that managed to ouste the elected government soley due to foreighn military support.

>>If you ever go to university, with sources like that I would immagine it would matter very fast what sources you use, even in america.

>>You say you aren't at war with the Libyan people, yet you drop bombs on theire cities, destroy there infrastructure, fund/arm and assist rebels which want to oust the elected government, based on the tribal democratic systems they have. And he has like 75% support, so you are only at war with 75% percent of the population, the rest I guess are terrorists and civilian casulties, or those people he apparently slaughtered?

>>139
And why don't you read the ancient greek ideas that the latin word Democracy was invented to refer to and learn its latin meaning before skipping ahead to arristotles yeah?

>>136
You're basically saying this:

"Waaah, waaah, waaah! Everything that the US is remotely involved with can't posssibly lead to bad things! The aliens did 9/11! My special teenage penis tells me that it's all a conspiracy!"

Dude, despite Gaddafi relying heavily on propaganda to control Libya, he has been pretty open with his crimes against the people, because up until recently, nobody thought that the libyan people would somehow gain the courage to fight someone that so obviously would just massacre any protesters. I'm amazed that they survived the first days. The only conspiracy going on, is in your pants.

>would somehow gain the courage to fight someone

It was a tribal civil war. It had nothing to do with freedom, truth or liberty.

>>142
If you're wrong, and this doesn't lead to freedom, truth or liberty for the libyan people when things have settled, will you chop off your own balls?

>>141
>>143
Also, I shouldn't write posts after smoking pot. I get problems with remembering which side I'm on. It's all negatives man, and I'm all positive.

>>141
Pretty much this.  Kind of like the child molester, except this time the kiddy fiddler tells his victims and their families what he's going to do.  They still put on the nice front for visiting social workers / world leaders.

I still remember the first sliver of hope in the civil war:
>How about a ceasefire?
>Sure, just need to finish off this bunch of rebels first ...

>>143
Yes I would. It's a Muslim nation in Africa. Are you fucking retarded? ARE FUCKING RETARDED ASSHOLE! It's a Muslim nation in Africa!

Shit nigger, get real. Stop being an embarrassment on /new/.

>>145
That is also normal in most Muslim nations.

Yasser Arafat did the same thing and the world yawned. Fucking little boys isn't considered to be a homosexual act in the Arab/Muslim world. You can marry 8 year old girls and fuck them to death legally.

It's only gay if do an adult male while being an adult male. Fucking children is like fucking an animal to them. They don't approve, but they are not going to stone you either. This is why so many gays end up being terrorists. They can redeem themselves and get what they want from Allah as a reward. There is a gay option in the Koran. Also, raping non-Muslims doesn't count either.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9q91Y19IYWI

KILL THE NATO RATS WHERE EVER YOU FIND THEM!

DEATH TO AL QAEDA AND AL JAZEERA RATS!

HANG THE FAT QATARI PIG EMIR!

ALLAH WA MUAMMAR WA LIBYA WA BAS!

GOD BLESS THE GREAT KADDAFI AND ASSAD RESISTING AND UNCOVERING THE ZIONIST PLOTS!

RATS CAN'T WIN WITHOUT NATO BOMBING THEM THEIR PATH!

LONG LIVE THE RESISTANCE!

http://ilibya.tv -- THE TRUTH!

>>148
>>149
there are loads of youtube comments like this, I'm guess gaddafi has an internet propoganda division

>>150
You just made that troll's day. Good job retard.

>>151
I'm just enriching the conversation, it's true, take a look.

youtube.com/watch?v=BIQYaA_zShI

I just got this video from google news.

Apparently most of the troll videos and troll comments are coming from within Libya itself.  Now bear in mind that since the civil war got real general access to the Internet in Libya has been cut off, with only certain government offices getting a line out.  Everyone else has been relying on using mobile phones to send video to people in other countries.

>>153
BROTHER LEADER OF THE GREAT AL-FATEH REVOLUTION IS WIDELY SUPPORTED ACROSS THE WORLD!
THE TRUE GREEN REVOLUTIONARIES ARE RESITING THE COLONIAL CRUSADER AGGRESSION AND FOREIGN MERCENARIES.
FOREIGN MERCENARIES CANNOT CRUSH THE GREAT JAMAHIRIYA!

ALLAH, MUAMMAR WA LIBYA WA BAS!

DON'T BELIEVE THE MEDIA LIES

LIBYAN REBELS ARE NATO SHILLS
9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB
PAUL IS DEAD
THERE IS NO BIELEFELD
TITANIC TRUTH NOW!

>>150
They DO have an internet propaganda division. Gaddafi has spearheaded the use of propaganda for decades.

Brother leader's speech of yesterday, September the 20th:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HnBLadMQBIU

Allah, Muammar wa Libya wa bas!

>>157
Make sure to flag not only all the videos of YouTube user G2XH for the reason "Supporting Terrorism" but also his friends videos. Remember the Abu Salim massacre. Remember the countless murders under his regime.

Gaddafi isn't dead yet. That guy is one hell of a troll. :)

>>159
It's not about getting revenge on Gaddafi, it's about the liberty and welfare of Libya.

>>160
I really hope they don't kill him. He needs to stand trial for what he's done, or his supporters are just going to deny these things and pretend he was a saint. Even Hitler needed to live out the rest of his life in jail, so that he doesn't leave unanswered questions.

>>161
The rebels have already said that they won't send him to Hague - they will judge him and then execute him and his sons. Sure, sounds like fair trial.

>>161
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4IRqYJhTDWU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IgKDGzK10Fw

Victory or martyr.

>It's not about getting revenge on Gaddafi, it's about the liberty and welfare of Libya.

Since when?

>>162
Why go after his whole family? Is being related to the guy a crime?

>>165
Based on some of the things he's done, probably.  For instance, pretty much his entire extended family has knowingly received and spent embezzled oil money.  Then we have the sons outside the military that got to use them as a private army - Saif in particular was notorious for this.

>>166
If the ruler of a country hands you money from government seized oil wells, then it's legal money. Gaddafi has been pouring "embezzled oil money" into running the entire country, yet do we hang every Lybian for not refusing to "handle stolen money"?
I hear one of his sons were even fighting for human rights in Lybia. Will he be executed as well?

>>166
>Why go after his whole family? Is being related to the guy a crime?

Also normal in Muslim nations.

>>167
>Gaddafi has been pouring "embezzled oil money" into running the entire country
Well, no.  By definition, if the money is reaching its proper destination (i.e. the government budget), then it's not been embezzled, has it?  Spending the public finances on schools and hospitals is fine.  Spending it on swish homes and cars and private jets for your family, not so much.  The son "fighting for human rights" was Saif, and it's fairly well-established that he was using it as a front for his inheriting the reins on the pretense of reform.

>>169
Saif was a diplomat, most likely enjoying diplomatic privilieges and pay, on top of gifts from his father. I can find nothing incriminating this man in any way, and he has declared that he had no intention of inheriting his fathers regime. At most Gaddafi made him hold a speech in support of Libyan troops at the beginning of the conflict, but this is part of military duty - not doing that would probably end up with him getting shot.

>>170
So basically your argument is "gaddafi never broke the law, gaddafi was the law".

>>170
>but this is part of military duty
But Saif had always insisted that he was not in the military and had no command over them.  That was the entire premise of his supposed "reformist" stance.

>>171
I'm not even talking about Gaddafi.

>>172
Still, if your father comes and says "Help them not kill me.", then that's hard to refuse, especially since Gaddafi has executed lots of people for less than that. It's also not a crime, so if Saif has done nothing worse, then why hunt him for "torture" among other things? Who has he tortured?

>>173
Presumably, they're hunting him down for torture because he has engaged in torture.  The ICC aren't your local police - they don't harass you for nothing.  If they were persuaded to issue an indictment, then they've got some solid evidence already.

>>174
It's "solid evidence" that nobody else has heard about. What makes you think that the ICC is above framing all descendants of every leader of every nation ever waged war with? I find that extremely weird.

>>175
>nobody else has heard about
ITYM "I haven't heard about".

>“They are liars,” he said of Amnesty International. “They said, in Libya they are still conducting torture and executions and so on. Therefore this is my response: Human rights in Libya are very well protected and maintained, and I think Libya is a good example for the Middle East. And I say this very proudly.”

This was at a time when it was known that Libya was torturing and executing dissidents.  Hell, they were forcibly repatriating exiles so they could be punished for their infidelity.

In Muslim nations, you kill the children of your enemies or make them slaves.

>>173
You are talking about one of Gaddafi's thugs, so you are talking about Gaddafi.

This is a plain absurd statement by you, logically you have lost this argument but something tells me you're too arrogant to admit you are wrong and apologise.

Gaddafi is cool.

>>179
Gaddafi is fighting against the entire world. Yet, he continues to troll us. He is a true hero.

Cut him some slack.

If you were military dictator of a country for over 40 years and still didn't manage to get promoted above colonel, then you would be pretty pissy too.

I think Gaddafi is a pretty cool guy, eh kills rebels and doesn't afraid of nothing.

A number of “external” and internal motives turned out to be sufficient for Gaddafi, who ten months ago was received with great honor in the leading countries of the world, to “suddenly” become a terrible dictator who must be overthrown immediately. Despite the fact that Gaddafi has repeatedly urged the UN to send an international commission to Libya capable of investigating the situation on the spot and determining the validity of government actions against the insurgency that began in Cyrenaica, instead of a UN Commission, there followed the UN Security Council resolution 1970 and then 1973, which in fact paved the way for the U.S. and NATO war against Tripoli and unconditional direct and indirect support to the rebels, including land-based activities as well as the supply of arms. This became possible due to the fact that Resolution 1973 contained a formulation (again, unprecedentedly vague) of the UN’s given mandate on the admissibility of the use of ANY MEASURE to “protect civilians», with the exception of military occupation; that is, it made possible the widest field of “interpretations” within the framework of the mandate (which was unprecedented for UN documents). Soon after the start of the war against Gaddafi, Pentagon Chief Robert Gates and Chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff Michael Mullen recognized at a meeting of the Senate Armed Services Committee that after Gaddafi’s departure, a power struggle will certainly unfold in Libya; moreover, Gates cautioned “not to exaggerate the ability of the Americans to influence the political outcome of the events in Libya” after the overthrow of Gaddafi. CNN. 02.24.2011
Nonetheless, the coalition aircraft and cruise missiles quickly destroyed Gaddafi’s aircraft, and then, insofar as there was nothing more to do where its mandate to “ensure a no-fly zone” was concerned, they began the destruction of Gaddafi’s armored vehicles and troops on the ground, as well as attempted to kill him by bombing the places where he might be located at that moment. Moreover, they used, among other things, attack aircraft AC-130, which are intended solely for the extermination of enemy personnel in the complete absence of air defense resources. 
Moreover, it quickly became clear that the only battle-capable troops available among the rebels were about a thousand Islamic militants, who had schooled in war in Afghanistan, Bosnia, Iraq and other hotspots; and that the others simply do not know even how to fight in an organized fashion, let alone how to use the weapons obtained from looted armories. (Die Welt 04.03.2011/Asia Times online 03.30.2011)
As a result, Gaddafi’s troops consistently and quickly attacked at moments when there are no NATO airplanes and rolled back when the air force carried out strikes against the troops of Tripoli. Moreover, NATO aircraft have repeatedly “by mistake” carried out missile and bomb strikes on tank columns and rebel communications. However, when the troops of Tripoli were moved from tanks to jeeps with machine guns indistinguishable from the jeeps of the Benghazi rebels, the military situation in Libya reached a deadlock, which in late March or early April was frankly acknowledged by the coalition commanders. (on April 7th, the chief of the U.S. African Command General Carter Ham admitted to the U. S. Congress that the military situation in Libya was a “dead-lock” – ITAR-TASS 04.08.2011).
After this, the basic mechanisms of the “world community’s” action against Gaddafi have changed substantially. Qatar – in violation of the commercial and military embargo imposed against Libya by UN Security Council resolution 1970 – began to sell Libyan oil on the world market on behalf of the rebels, as well as supply Benghazi with the most modern (including French) weapons. AFP 04.12.2011/ Le Monde 04.18.2011
The U.S.A., Great Britain, and France increased the contingents of their intelligence services among the rebel military. Now “special forces” from these countries not only aim missiles and coalition aircraft at Gaddafi, but also supply Benghazi with communications equipment and direct battles, as well as hastily train rebel soldiers in modern methods of warfare. But most importantly, the disinformation war against the government in Tripoli and Gadhafi personally has sharply increased. These lies started even before the war by stating that the League of Arab States in full force strongly demanded that the UN intervene in the situation in Libya. In fact, only 11 out of 22 countries attended the Arab League meeting, and at first the proposal to appeal to the UN was supported by only 7 members of the Arab League (the 6 Gulf monarchies and Egypt in the person of the current head of the Arab League Amr Moussa). After debates, there were 9 supporters of the resolution, but two countries – Algeria and Syria –still voted against an appeal to the UN. (Asia Times online 03.30.2011). Then the “international media” reported that the main “strike force” of Gaddafi’s troops carrying out genocide against the Libyan people are foreign mercenaries from the so-called “Islamic Legion”. However, Human Rights Watch, which has never sympathized with Gaddafi, has acknowledged that its activists in Libya have no data on the participation of fighters from the Legion in the repression and suppression of mass demonstrations in Libyan cities. Then the international media began vying with each other to quote Al-Jazeera’s falsifications about the tens of thousands of civilians killed by Gaddafi’s troops, as well as the willingness of almost all of Gaddafi’s associates to betray him and cross over to the side of rebels. (dailymail.co.uk 04.01.2011) At a summit, a “contact group on Libya” was hastily created, where Qatar again sets the tone, announcing that an indispensable and essential condition for peace in Libya was the immediate and unconditional removal from power of Gaddafi himself, his family members, and close associates. (La Republica 04.14.2011)
The apotheosis of this campaign was two events. On April 15th, the head of the French Defense Ministry Gérard Longuet said that his country, the U.S.A., and Britain intended to go beyond the mandate of the UN Security Council’s Resolution 1973.  (AFP 04.15.2011)

On the same day, all the world’s leading media released a joint statement by Obama, Sarkozy, and Cameron, in which, as a justification for the need to escalate the coalition war in Libya, they repeat the myth that Gaddafi is a killer who started and is waging war against his own civilians and that the haste of the coalition was called for due to “humanitarian purposes” – the need to immediately stop the dictator. (The Times 04.15.2011) It is true that shortly before this appeal, Abdel Fattah Younes, Gaddafi’s former Interior Minister and now commander of the armed forces of the rebels, tarnished the noble reputation of the “insurgents”. Younes was indignant about the refusal of NATO forces to bomb Misurata because there are civilians there and said that “where there are Gaddafi’s troops, there are no civilians”. (BBCnews 04.05.2011)
Then the above-mentioned statement of the three leaders who started the war against Gaddafi was disavowed by the publication of a report by the Human Rights Watch mission to investigate the situation of the victims of Gaddafi’s troops at Misurata (the world’s media has repeated every day that there are many thousands of such victims among civilians in the words of “representatives of the rebels”). (Boston Globe 04.14.2011)
It turned out that the Human Rights Watch mission counted that in two months of war, 257 were killed and 949 were wounded in Misurata, and among the wounded there were only 22 women. This would have been completely impossible in the event of bombing civilians – in this case among the wounded there would have been many children and roughly an equal number of women and men. However, what is again remarkable and proves the existence of a coordinated disinformation campaign against the Libyan government is that neither the Human Rights Watch report nor the Boston Globe article appeared in the mainstream press and television. The world’s media in the days that followed just as assiduously repeated the “messages of the Libyan opposition” about the hundreds and thousands of Gaddafi victims among the civilian population. On April 18th, EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Catherine Ashton said that the EU countries had agreed to send ground troops to Libya for the protection of humanitarian convoys, “if so requested by the UN”. She stressed that these troops would not participate in hostilities and thus do not violate the UN Security Council resolution. (ITAR-TASS  04.18.2011). On April 19th, coalition aircraft began to carry out missile and bomb strikes on the central areas of Tripoli and other towns under the control of Gaddafi “with the aim to protect civilians”.  (ITAR-TASS 04.20-22.2011)
On April 21st, Barack Obama sanctioned the use of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) with missile weapons in operations against Gaddafi. (The Washington Post 04.21.2011) On April 22nd, U.S. Senator John McCain arrived in Benghazi and urged the U.S.A. and other countries around the world to immediately recognize the “Transitional National Council” of the rebels as the only legitimate authority in Libya, to provide it with all the frozen assets of the Libyan Government, to increase air strikes on Gaddafi, and to intensify training of insurgents and the supply of weapons to them. (The Associated Press 04.22.2011).
On the same day, the Sarkozy administration announced its intention to unfreeze “Gaddafi’s assets” and to begin funding the Libyan opposition with them. (Reuters 04.22.2011).
Also on the same day, Gaddafi’s troops left Misurata; moreover Gaddafi invited representatives of the local tribes to negotiate themselves with the rebels for surrender, or to fight them themselves. (AFP 04.22.2011) 
On April 23rd, fighting in Misurata resumed and NATO aircraft bombed the central districts and suburbs of Tripoli. On April 24th, NATO undertook missile and bomb strikes on the Libyan government administrative complex, Bab al-Azizia, in the heart of Tripoli, which were the most powerful since the war began. According to reports by journalists in Tripoli, one of the buildings in the complex was destroyed and the others were badly damaged. More than 45 people were injured, 15 of them seriously, and all three state TV channels stopped broadcasting for an hour. (Reuters 04.25.2011; RBCdaily 04.25.2011)
Also on the same day, the Italian La Stampa reported that Rome had sent groups of Special Forces to Libya to help the Benghazi rebels as early as a few weeks ago. On April 30th, both the “the interim government in Benghazi” and NATO leaders rejected another offer by Gaddafi to negotiate a truce without preliminary conditions (Reuters 04.30.2011), after which the firing on Misurata and rebel positions in Western Libya by Gaddafi’s military forces and the NATO bombing of Gaddafi’s forces continued. On the night of April 30th to May 1st, as a result of NATO bombing of one of the residences of Muammar Gaddafi in Tripoli, his 29-year-old son, Saif al-Arab and Gaddafi’s three young grandchildren were killed: two year-old Carthage, the daughter of Hannibal Gaddafi; five-year Macura, daughter of Colonel Gaddafi’s daughter Aisha; and 15-month-old Saif Muhammad, Muhammad Gaddafi’s son, as well as several friends and neighbors. It is reported that Maummar Gaddafi himself and his wife were in the same residence, but were not affected (The WSJ 05.03.2011). Moreover, NATO officials stated that the target in their attack was not the Libyan leader or his family, but “military targets”. Mass demonstrations calling for revenge for the death of the Libyan leader’s son and grandchildren of Libyan leader have taken place on the Libyan territory controlled by Gaddafi. In Tripoli, the (long-closed) Embassies of the U.S.A., Britain and Italy were destroyed. Moreover, the Libyan Deputy Foreign Minister, Khaled Kaim, immediately apologized for the violation of diplomatic rules, saying that the police could not cope with the crowd, outraged by the NATO bombing and the deaths of the relatives of Libyan leader, and announced that the Libyan leadership will assess the damage inflicted on diplomatic missions and carry out repair restoration work (Reuters 05.02.2011).Against the backdrop of this “war”, a scandal between EU countries is unfolding over the reception of refugees from Libya, which are coming to Italy in a rising tide (mostly to Lampedusa). The matter has gone so far that in connection with the problem, France has initiated a review within the EU to suspend the Schengen agreements,  (Euronews 04.22.2011) which has been met with understanding and support not only by Italy, but also by Germany and a number of other countries. While the talk is of a “temporary” suspension of the Schengen open borders, some experts are already saying that this “temporary” measure may end up being indefinitely prolonged.

On the one hand, Qaddafi sponsored terrorism against the US for decades.  Recall Lockerbie?  Recall the Achille Lauro?  If any tinpot Turd World dictator had it coming, it was him.  If there was any living head of state the US owed this to, it was him.  He was a few decades overdue for a late-night visit from the Navy SEALS, for sure.

But.

That's not what Obama & Co. appear to have any interest in doing here.  Five Presidents have had a thousand opportunities to mount Qaddafi's head on one of the decorative iron spikes of the White House fence.  I can't tell, in fact, what the fuck their plan is, or what their objective is, or what they're trying to do.

Is this about the oil?  When Obama opened his big moronic mouth and blabbered about "the Arab spring" and stabbed long-time US ally Hosni Mubarak in the back, gasoline went up a dollar a gallon in the US in a week, and in case you dumbfucks missed anything, it is still up there.

Is this about terrorism?  The "rebels" we're arming and renting the US Navy out to, who want "democracy" in Libya are, in fact, the local franchise of the Moslem Brotherhood terrorist organization, of which Al-Qaeda is a splinter group.  This has been known for years.  This isn't the first time Al-Qaeda has tried to overthrow governments in North Africa for not being anti-Western enough.

Is this about a long-delayed revenge on Qaddafi?  Why'd Obama dither and blither and bluster and stand around with his dick in his hand and his thumb up his ass for weeks, and let him go into hiding, then, instead of sending DEVGRU to whack him when all this started this spring?

Maybe Obama was just bored.  He looks like he's not having fun as President, don't you think?  He looks like a spoiled kid who cried and cried and whined and whined for an expensive toy, then got it, only to learn it wasn't as much fun as the TV commercials made it look.  Jesus fucking Christ.  Remember when we had adults in the White House?

Gaddafi is a better leader than Obama. That is the scary truth.

I wonder if Gaddafi will outlast Obama?

>>184
Go back to bed, Lizzie.

>>185
>He was a few decades overdue for a late-night visit from the Navy SEALS, for sure.
They have tried.  The current resolution prevented them from trying again when the revolution kicked off.

>>188
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RFvpfkUyBqE&NR=1

>>185 On the one hand, USA sponsored terrorism against the USSR for decades.  Recall Afghanistan (1979-1989)? Yugoslavia (radical groups in bosnian war)? Chechnya?

>USA sponsored terrorism

Your moral equivalence is hypocritically delicious.

>>191
Oh, yeah right, they were supporting free spirited souls (mujahidin) in the fight against “blood thirsty” communism. And that’s not hypocritical at all!!!!!

>>192
You do understand that the Russians were invading Afghanistan to conquer it? You  do realize that was in fact an actual war? You DO know that, right.

That's a bit different from murdering and targeting civilians for political reasons and you SHOULD know that. Nothing obviously fucking retarded about missing those minor points.

Hypocrite...

>>193
You do realise that Afghanistan under communism could have been a much better place than nowadays fundamental islamistic shithole, selling drugs and producing terrorists?

Not if the Northern Alliance guys took power from the beginning instead of the Taliban.

http://dis.4chan.org/read/newpol/1313949781/7

Read this!
http://pastebin.com/JMX9NvYH