Libya Dictator Gadhafi Dead

  • metta

    Posts: 39112

    Oct 20, 2011 5:21 PM GMT
    Libya Dictator Gadhafi Dead


    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44971257/ns/world_news-mideast_n_africa/?GT1=43001



    http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/regions/africa/111020/gaddafi-news-libya-leader-dead

  • metta

    Posts: 39112

    Oct 20, 2011 7:04 PM GMT
    Obama: Gadhafi death ends painful chapter

    http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2011/10/20/national/w090611D69.DTL&tsp=1
  • HndsmKansan

    Posts: 16311

    Oct 20, 2011 7:08 PM GMT
    Not too surprised really. After what he has done and the remarks he made about never leaving, I think you could kind of expect this result.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 20, 2011 7:21 PM GMT
    Found hiding in a hole in the ground. Reminds me of another brutal dictator several years ago. One by one they go bye bye, but the big question is what will replace them? A question I always had for the Neocons. Will it get even worse?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 20, 2011 7:26 PM GMT
    I'm glad that his death was at the hands of his own people, after all the pain and suffering he has inflicted on them over the years it all went down the right way.

    I just hope the U.S and the U.K keep their noses out of Libya's affairs.........
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 20, 2011 7:37 PM GMT
    It already is worse.

    All the "reasons" we went to war with Libya turned out to be fabricated, from the alleged massacres of civilians (though there were civilian deaths, as well as government deaths, but there was fighting and killing on both sides), there were no helicopters or jets being used to kill civilians (even the Pentagon admitted that when it was first reported), there was no viagra being handed out to troops to commit rape, in fact, there were no legitimate rape cases that were proven as a result of Gadhafi's troops, and there were no African mercenaries, that turned out to be completely false, according to independent on the ground investigations by Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and Doctors Without Borders.

    The small little clique we decided to support in this war (which we mistakenly portrayed as the Libyan majority, when the Libyan majority in fact supported Gadhafi against NATO), were linked to al-Qaeda, and are largely racist militants who have been ethnically cleansing the towns they have captured of Libya's black population, and especially black African migrant population. The militant racist terrorists we refer to as "rebels" (just like how Reagan referred to both the original al-Qaeda in Afghanistan and the terrorist drug-running death squads in Latin America that the US was supporting as "freedom fighters"), were kidnapping African migrant workers and parading them in front of the international media as "mercenaries" and then either releasing them later or, if they were not so lucky, lynching them.

    So we removed a dictator to create a likely civil war. We plunged the nation into chaos, death, and destruction, and support a brutal, militant, racist minority group to usurp power (which was impossible without the literally thousands of NATO bombings), and they likely have already committed more atrocities in this short time than Gadhafi has in his 40+ year reign, and he was no angel.

    And this is what we call "humanitarian intervention." Of course, the fact that Libya has the largest oil reserves in Africa, as well as the fact that Gadhafi was causing major problems for foreign (American and European) oil conglomerates there (in demanding a higher share of profits for the government), I'm sure this has nothing to do with NATO's interest in Libya... even though American policy planners expect to get more oil from Africa by 2020 than from Saudi Arabia... that's just incidental. Our interest is strictly "humanitarian," as it always is... uh huh.
  • Mepark

    Posts: 806

    Oct 20, 2011 7:55 PM GMT
    whateveryo saidI'm glad that his death was at the hands of his own people, after all the pain and suffering he has inflicted on them over the years it all went down the right way.

    I just hope the U.S and the U.K keep their noses out of Libya's affairs.........


    That's not going to happen. The U.S. and the UK, among others are running things from under. There is no way we are going to allow the new government to be another anti-west regime. I wouldn't be surprised if the next president or prime minister received his higher education from right here in our own backyard.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 20, 2011 8:00 PM GMT
    Mepark said
    whateveryo saidI'm glad that his death was at the hands of his own people, after all the pain and suffering he has inflicted on them over the years it all went down the right way.

    I just hope the U.S and the U.K keep their noses out of Libya's affairs.........


    That's not going to happen. The U.S. and the UK, among others are running things from under. There is no way we are going to allow the new government to be another anti-west regime. I wouldn't be surprised if the next president or prime minister received his higher education from right here in our own backyard.


    The people in Libya aren't stupid, they will smell another 'puppet' president a mile away......you are correct though, where there is oil there is the U.S ! It will be interesting to see what happens politically over the next few months.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 20, 2011 8:11 PM GMT
    I hope the next one will be Castro
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 20, 2011 8:36 PM GMT
    I'll take Kim Jong-il, Assad and Ahmadinejad.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 20, 2011 8:41 PM GMT
    erizo saidI hope the next one will be Castro


    Yeah, spending a couple million on a covert operation to assassinate an almost 90 year old former leader is a great use of public money!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 20, 2011 8:45 PM GMT
    erizo saidI hope the next one will be Castro


    Meh, Castro is bad, but I would rather see iran and n-korea's leaders fall... they are much worse
  • hallyhallo

    Posts: 539

    Oct 20, 2011 8:47 PM GMT
    MeOhMy saidIt already is worse.

    All the "reasons" we went to war with Libya turned out to be fabricated, from the alleged massacres of civilians (though there were civilian deaths, as well as government deaths, but there was fighting and killing on both sides), there were no helicopters or jets being used to kill civilians (even the Pentagon admitted that when it was first reported), there was no viagra being handed out to troops to commit rape, in fact, there were no legitimate rape cases that were proven as a result of Gadhafi's troops, and there were no African mercenaries, that turned out to be completely false, according to independent on the ground investigations by Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and Doctors Without Borders.

    The small little clique we decided to support in this war (which we mistakenly portrayed as the Libyan majority, when the Libyan majority in fact supported Gadhafi against NATO), were linked to al-Qaeda, and are largely racist militants who have been ethnically cleansing the towns they have captured of Libya's black population, and especially black African migrant population. The militant racist terrorists we refer to as "rebels" (just like how Reagan referred to both the original al-Qaeda in Afghanistan and the terrorist drug-running death squads in Latin America that the US was supporting as "freedom fighters"), were kidnapping African migrant workers and parading them in front of the international media as "mercenaries" and then either releasing them later or, if they were not so lucky, lynching them.

    So we removed a dictator to create a likely civil war. We plunged the nation into chaos, death, and destruction, and support a brutal, militant, racist minority group to usurp power (which was impossible without the literally thousands of NATO bombings), and they likely have already committed more atrocities in this short time than Gadhafi has in his 40+ year reign, and he was no angel.

    And this is what we call "humanitarian intervention." Of course, the fact that Libya has the largest oil reserves in Africa, as well as the fact that Gadhafi was causing major problems for foreign (American and European) oil conglomerates there (in demanding a higher share of profits for the government), I'm sure this has nothing to do with NATO's interest in Libya... even though American policy planners expect to get more oil from Africa by 2020 than from Saudi Arabia... that's just incidental. Our interest is strictly "humanitarian," as it always is... uh huh.


    interesting thoughts! Maybe i am biased by the Western media. Do you have any sources for this?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 20, 2011 8:47 PM GMT
    MeOhMy saidIt already is worse.

    All the "reasons" we went to war with Libya turned out to be fabricated, from the alleged massacres of civilians (though there were civilian deaths, as well as government deaths, but there was fighting and killing on both sides), there were no helicopters or jets being used to kill civilians (even the Pentagon admitted that when it was first reported), there was no viagra being handed out to troops to commit rape, in fact, there were no legitimate rape cases that were proven as a result of Gadhafi's troops, and there were no African mercenaries, that turned out to be completely false, according to independent on the ground investigations by Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and Doctors Without Borders.

    The small little clique we decided to support in this war (which we mistakenly portrayed as the Libyan majority, when the Libyan majority in fact supported Gadhafi against NATO), were linked to al-Qaeda, and are largely racist militants who have been ethnically cleansing the towns they have captured of Libya's black population, and especially black African migrant population. The militant racist terrorists we refer to as "rebels" (just like how Reagan referred to both the original al-Qaeda in Afghanistan and the terrorist drug-running death squads in Latin America that the US was supporting as "freedom fighters"), were kidnapping African migrant workers and parading them in front of the international media as "mercenaries" and then either releasing them later or, if they were not so lucky, lynching them.

    So we removed a dictator to create a likely civil war. We plunged the nation into chaos, death, and destruction, and support a brutal, militant, racist minority group to usurp power (which was impossible without the literally thousands of NATO bombings), and they likely have already committed more atrocities in this short time than Gadhafi has in his 40+ year reign, and he was no angel.

    And this is what we call "humanitarian intervention." Of course, the fact that Libya has the largest oil reserves in Africa, as well as the fact that Gadhafi was causing major problems for foreign (American and European) oil conglomerates there (in demanding a higher share of profits for the government), I'm sure this has nothing to do with NATO's interest in Libya... even though American policy planners expect to get more oil from Africa by 2020 than from Saudi Arabia... that's just incidental. Our interest is strictly "humanitarian," as it always is... uh huh.


    A-huh... so that would mean its Afghanistan all over again? My goodness... the leaders of the US seem to really like getting themselves in league with terrorists... its very disconcerting... sickening even
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 20, 2011 8:54 PM GMT
    GreenHopper said
    MeOhMy saidIt already is worse.

    All the "reasons" we went to war with Libya turned out to be fabricated, from the alleged massacres of civilians (though there were civilian deaths, as well as government deaths, but there was fighting and killing on both sides), there were no helicopters or jets being used to kill civilians (even the Pentagon admitted that when it was first reported), there was no viagra being handed out to troops to commit rape, in fact, there were no legitimate rape cases that were proven as a result of Gadhafi's troops, and there were no African mercenaries, that turned out to be completely false, according to independent on the ground investigations by Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and Doctors Without Borders.

    The small little clique we decided to support in this war (which we mistakenly portrayed as the Libyan majority, when the Libyan majority in fact supported Gadhafi against NATO), were linked to al-Qaeda, and are largely racist militants who have been ethnically cleansing the towns they have captured of Libya's black population, and especially black African migrant population. The militant racist terrorists we refer to as "rebels" (just like how Reagan referred to both the original al-Qaeda in Afghanistan and the terrorist drug-running death squads in Latin America that the US was supporting as "freedom fighters"), were kidnapping African migrant workers and parading them in front of the international media as "mercenaries" and then either releasing them later or, if they were not so lucky, lynching them.

    So we removed a dictator to create a likely civil war. We plunged the nation into chaos, death, and destruction, and support a brutal, militant, racist minority group to usurp power (which was impossible without the literally thousands of NATO bombings), and they likely have already committed more atrocities in this short time than Gadhafi has in his 40+ year reign, and he was no angel.

    And this is what we call "humanitarian intervention." Of course, the fact that Libya has the largest oil reserves in Africa, as well as the fact that Gadhafi was causing major problems for foreign (American and European) oil conglomerates there (in demanding a higher share of profits for the government), I'm sure this has nothing to do with NATO's interest in Libya... even though American policy planners expect to get more oil from Africa by 2020 than from Saudi Arabia... that's just incidental. Our interest is strictly "humanitarian," as it always is... uh huh.


    A-huh... so that would mean its Afghanistan all over again? My goodness... the leaders of the US seem to really like getting themselves in league with terrorists... its very disconcerting... sickening even


    If you have ever read anything by Noam Chomsky you realise very quickly how sickening the U.S government really is. It's nearly always about valuable resource control with any 'humanitarian' intervention.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 20, 2011 9:04 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    whateveryo said where there is oil there is the U.S !


    Except of course in the U.S. where offshore drilling is being crippled to the point of shutdown by the current occupant of the White House.
    SB.. the dude is dead.. get a grip!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 20, 2011 9:06 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    whateveryo said where there is oil there is the U.S !


    Except of course in the U.S. where offshore drilling is being crippled to the point of shutdown by the current occupant of the White House.


    Two Words:

    Deepwater Horizon.


    In any case... its all disturbing..... there's no unfiltered truth anymore and really what's truth depends on what perspective you are taking.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 20, 2011 9:12 PM GMT
    Tazo995 said
    erizo saidI hope the next one will be Castro


    Yeah, spending a couple million on a covert operation to assassinate an almost 90 year old former leader is a great use of public money!


    Much bigger and younger priorities than Castro.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 20, 2011 9:14 PM GMT
    whateveryo said
    GreenHopper said
    MeOhMy saidIt already is worse.

    All the "reasons" we went to war with Libya turned out to be fabricated, from the alleged massacres of civilians (though there were civilian deaths, as well as government deaths, but there was fighting and killing on both sides), there were no helicopters or jets being used to kill civilians (even the Pentagon admitted that when it was first reported), there was no viagra being handed out to troops to commit rape, in fact, there were no legitimate rape cases that were proven as a result of Gadhafi's troops, and there were no African mercenaries, that turned out to be completely false, according to independent on the ground investigations by Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and Doctors Without Borders.

    The small little clique we decided to support in this war (which we mistakenly portrayed as the Libyan majority, when the Libyan majority in fact supported Gadhafi against NATO), were linked to al-Qaeda, and are largely racist militants who have been ethnically cleansing the towns they have captured of Libya's black population, and especially black African migrant population. The militant racist terrorists we refer to as "rebels" (just like how Reagan referred to both the original al-Qaeda in Afghanistan and the terrorist drug-running death squads in Latin America that the US was supporting as "freedom fighters"), were kidnapping African migrant workers and parading them in front of the international media as "mercenaries" and then either releasing them later or, if they were not so lucky, lynching them.

    So we removed a dictator to create a likely civil war. We plunged the nation into chaos, death, and destruction, and support a brutal, militant, racist minority group to usurp power (which was impossible without the literally thousands of NATO bombings), and they likely have already committed more atrocities in this short time than Gadhafi has in his 40+ year reign, and he was no angel.

    And this is what we call "humanitarian intervention." Of course, the fact that Libya has the largest oil reserves in Africa, as well as the fact that Gadhafi was causing major problems for foreign (American and European) oil conglomerates there (in demanding a higher share of profits for the government), I'm sure this has nothing to do with NATO's interest in Libya... even though American policy planners expect to get more oil from Africa by 2020 than from Saudi Arabia... that's just incidental. Our interest is strictly "humanitarian," as it always is... uh huh.


    A-huh... so that would mean its Afghanistan all over again? My goodness... the leaders of the US seem to really like getting themselves in league with terrorists... its very disconcerting... sickening even


    If you have ever read anything by Noam Chomsky you realise very quickly how sickening the U.S government really is. It's nearly always about valuable resource control with any 'humanitarian' intervention.


    One instance when I'd say - consider the source.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 20, 2011 10:12 PM GMT
    Source:

    Now, instead of posting all the individual articles and citations here (as I have done elsewhere), I will point you to my article on the subject where I elaborate at great length and detail on all these subjects (and more), and included at the bottom are the 127 citations (almost exclusively are which mainstream news articles) that you can help yourself to, to see where my information comes from (i.e., publicly available information, though it is not widely known).

    [url]http://andrewgavinmarshall.com/2011/08/26/lies-war-and-empire-nato’s-“humanitarian-imperialism”-in-libya/[/url]

    Propaganda gets repeated, truth gets buried.

    Just like how George Orwell explained with the "memory hole," where every time a new story comes forward, all history is ignored, facts thrown down the "memory hole" so that the new line - the propaganda line - is the only history that ever was, the only "fact" worthy of repetition.

    My job simply consists in connecting the dots, not repeating the absurdities.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 20, 2011 11:00 PM GMT
    MeOhMy saidSource:

    Now, instead of posting all the individual articles and citations here (as I have done elsewhere), I will point you to my article on the subject where I elaborate at great length and detail on all these subjects (and more), and included at the bottom are the 127 citations (almost exclusively are which mainstream news articles) that you can help yourself to, to see where my information comes from (i.e., publicly available information, though it is not widely known).

    [url]http://andrewgavinmarshall.com/2011/08/26/lies-war-and-empire-nato’s-“humanitarian-imperialism”-in-libya/[/url]

    Propaganda gets repeated, truth gets buried.

    Just like how George Orwell explained with the "memory hole," where every time a new story comes forward, all history is ignored, facts thrown down the "memory hole" so that the new line - the propaganda line - is the only history that ever was, the only "fact" worthy of repetition.

    My job simply consists in connecting the dots, not repeating the absurdities.


    you present really articulate and well researched arguments, kudos !
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 20, 2011 11:07 PM GMT
    kthnxbai
  • commoncoll

    Posts: 1222

    Oct 21, 2011 3:11 AM GMT
    freedomisntfree said

    One instance when I'd say - consider the source.

    The US and NATO are not involved in Syria even though there is a conflict going on for months now.

    Why? NO OIL
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 21, 2011 3:14 AM GMT
    at last someone posted it ... hehe ... congratz for them !
  • metta

    Posts: 39112

    Oct 21, 2011 5:32 PM GMT

    Gaddafi's killing fuels Syria's Friday protests


    http://news.yahoo.com/gaddafis-killing-fuels-syrias-friday-protests-105627624.html