posted
''Former nightclub dancer reveals how she had a 'crazy' six-year fling with Gaddafi's son and watched as he blew millions.''
Without my reading the article, what's her complaint? That it ended? Did he tire of her? Is she ticked because her 'crazy'' six year lifestyle was interrupted too soon.
Should I read the lengthy article... and come to the same conclusion?
Posts: 2118 | From: midwest, USA | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged |
Who do you think declares it then? The ones that want it or the group who doesn't? I go with former, those that hate Gaddafi US/EU. Or is it that you dont see it as a declaration of war?
Posts: 4254 | From: dasein | Registered: Jun 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well if the Colonel wants to appear unintimidated then he might declare war if the west announces a no fly zone. But if he does this then he may be playing into the U.S's and others hand who probably will set him up on a Gulf of Tonkin type charge. But, he can declare war and not attack anything the cowboys have thereby not giving the gunslingers reasons to attack simply because of a no fly zone. He can take his time and root out the discontents by using ground forces, that is, killing them at a snail's pace--on the ground--so as not to rile up the western cowboys who undoubtedly would have to act much more quickly to save face if the Colonel became impatient and wanted to end everything suddenly by attacking in overwhelming force...assuming he has this type force of course.
In this case a no fly zone won't be the issue. Khaddafi will still be in power and the cowboys can say ho hum, at least they prevented wholesale killing by the intimidation factor, i.e., no fly zone; they'll simply settle for that small scale killing noted above, even if it takes the colonel several more weeks of struggle.
The oil prices will settle but the speculators and the oil companies will be mad because their run on money will have stopped at some time much too soon for their interests.
Posts: 2118 | From: midwest, USA | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged |
Forget "democracy"; Libya, unlike Egypt and Tunisia, is an oil power. Many a plush office of United States and European elites will be salivating at the prospect of taking advantage of a small window of opportunity afforded by the anti-Muammar Gaddafi revolution to establish - or expand - a beachhead. There's all that oil, of course. There's also the allure, close by, of the US$10 billion, 4,128 kilometer long Trans-Saharan gas pipeline from Nigeria to Algeria, expected to be online in 2015.
Thus the world, once again, is reintroduced to war porn, history as farce, a bad rerun of "shock and awe". Everyone - the United Nations, the US, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) - is up in arms about a no-fly zone. Special forces are on the move, as are US warships.
Breathless US senators compare Libya with Yugoslavia. Tony "The Return of the Living Dead" Blair is back in missionary zeal form, its mirror image played by British Prime Minister David Cameron, duly mocked by Gaddafi's son, the "modernizer" Saif al-Islam. There's fear of "chemical weapons". Welcome back to humanitarian imperialism - on crack.
And like a character straight out of Scary Movie, even war-on-Iraq-architect Paul Wolfowitz wants a NATO-enforced no-fly zone, as the Foreign Policy Initiative - the son of the Project for the New American Century - publishes an open letter to US President Barack Obama demanding military boots to turn Libya into a protectorate ruled by NATO in the name of the "international community".
The mere fact that all these people are supporting the Libya protesters makes it all stink to - over the rainbow - high heavens. Sending His Awesomeness Charlie Sheen to whack Gaddafi would seem more believable.
It was up to Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov to introduce a note of sanity, describing the notion of a no-fly zone over Libya as "superfluous". This means in practice a Russian veto at the UN Security Council. Earlier, China had already changed the conversation.
In their Sheen-style hysteria - with US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton desperately offering "any kind of assistance" - Western politicians did not bother to consult with the people who are risking their lives to overthrow Gaddafi. At a press conference in Benghazi, the spokesman for the brand new Libyan National Transitional Council, human-rights lawyer Abdel-Hafidh Ghoga, was blunt, "We are against any foreign intervention or military intervention in our internal affairs ... This revolution will be completed by our people."
The people in question, by the way, are protecting Libya's oil industry, and even loading supertankers destined to Europe and China. The people in question do not have much to do with opportunists such as former Gaddafi-appointed justice minister Mustafa Abdel-Jalil, who wants a provisional government to prepare for elections in three months. Moreover, the people in question, as al-Jazeera has reported, have been saying they don't want foreign intervention for a week now.
The Benghazi council prefers to describe itself as the "political face for the revolution", organizing civic affairs, and not established as an interim government. Meanwhile, a military committee of officer defectors is trying to set up a skeleton army to be sent to Tripoli; through tribal contacts, they seem to have already infiltrated small cells into the vicinity of Tripoli.
Whether this self-appointed revolutionary leadership - splinter elements of the established elite, the tribes and the army - will be the face of a new regime, or whether they will be overtaken by younger, more radical activists, remains to be seen.
Shower me with hypocrisy
None of this anyway has placated the hysterical Western narrative, according to which there are only two options for Libya; to become a failed state or the next al-Qaeda haven. How ironic. Up to 2008, Libya was dismissed by Washington as a rogue state and an unofficial member of the "axis of evil" that originally included Iraq, Iran and North Korea.
As former NATO supreme commander Wesley Clark confirmed years ago, Libya was on the Pentagon/neo-conservative official list to be taken out after Iraq, along with Somalia, Sudan, Lebanon, Syria and the holy grail, Iran. But as soon as wily Gaddafi became an official partner in the "war on terror", Libya was instantly upgraded by the George W Bush administration to civilized status.
As for the UN Security Council unanimously deciding to refer the Gaddafi regime to the International Criminal Court (ICC), it's useful to remember that the ICC was created in mid-1998 by 148 countries meeting in Rome. The final vote was 120 to seven. The seven that voted against the ICC were China, Iraq, Israel, Qatar and Yemen, plus Libya and ... the United States. Incidentally, Israel killed more Palestinian civilians in two weeks around new year 2008 than Gaddafi these past two weeks.
This tsunami of hypocrisy inevitably raises the question; what does the West know about the Arab world anyway? Recently the executive board of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) praised a certain northern African country for its "ambitious reform agenda" and its "strong macroeconomic performance and the progress on enhancing the role of the private sector". The country was Libya. The IMF had only forgotten to talk to the main actors: the Libyan people.
And what to make of Anthony Giddens - the guru behind Blair's "Third Way" - who in March 2007 penned an article to The Guardian saying "Libya is not especially repressive" and "Gaddafi seems genuinely popular"? Giddens bet that Libya "in two or three decades' time would be a Norway of North Africa: prosperous, egalitarian and forward-looking". Tripoli may well be on its way to Oslo - but without the Gaddafi clan.
The US, Britain and France are so awkwardly maneuvering for best post-Gaddafi positioning it's almost comical to watch. Beijing, even against its will, waited until extra time to condemn Gaddafi at the UN, but made sure it was following the lead of African and Asian countries (smart move, as in "we listen to the voices of the South"). Beijing is extremely worried that its complex economic relationship with oil source Libya does not unravel (amid all the hoopla about fleeing expats, China quietly evacuated no less than 30,000 Chinese workers in the oil and construction business).
Once again; it's the oil, stupid. A crucial strategic factor for Washington is that post-Gaddafi Libya may represent a bonanza for US Big Oil - which for the moment has been kept away from Libya. Under this perspective, Libya may be considered as yet one more battleground between the US and China. But while China goes for energy and business deals in Africa, the US bets on its forces in AFRICOM as well as NATO advancing "military cooperation" with the African Union.
The anti-Gaddafi movement must remain on maximum alert. It's fair to argue the absolute majority of Libyans are using all their resourcefulness and are wiling to undergo any sacrifice to build a united, transparent and democratic country. And they will do it on their own. They may accept humanitarian help. As for war porn, throw it in the dustbin of history.
Civil War is happening in Libya and it seems the media is so biased it's rediculos.
Let me just say I support peaceful revolutions like Egypt. I really can't get around how the Libyan people are killing ANY Black African(Libyan or Sub Saharan) and claim them as mercenaries as there excuse....Thats just pathetic. You hope the Libyans would learn from Egypt how to do a Revolution and fight for freedom without all the senseless violence and hatred. It's time Lybians see that Africans are there brothers and sisters and stop all the killings.
Peace
Posts: 9651 | From: Reace and Love City. | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Big difference King. In Egypt the Army refused to kill the people and decided babaMu had to go to regain some sort of peace in this country, The Egyptian army are for the country and people first. In Libya the Army refused to kill the people so the nutter shipped in a load from other African countries that will have no problems with mass killings, hence the Libyan people killing what you claim as 'any blacks' because they ARE the paid killers shipped in to do nutters killing for him. At this rate Libya will have no Libyans left, a head nutter and a mass of African killing machines. Someone needs to aim at this nutters third eye and fire.
-------------------- If you don't learn from your mistakes, there's no sense making them. Posts: 15090 | From: http://www.egyptalk.com/forum/ | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
So you have Proof that the whole Lybian army is fighting for the Rebels??
If it's just "Hired" Killers from Africa then Ghadaffi should not be able to stand against the Libyan Rebels. If the Army fights with the Rebels then they should be able to rest control of the country easy then.
Peace
Posts: 9651 | From: Reace and Love City. | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
So you have Proof that the whole Lybian army is fighting for the Rebels??
If it's just "Hired" Killers from Africa then Ghadaffi should not be able to stand against the Libyan Rebels. If the Army fights with the Rebels then they should be able to rest control of the country easy then.
Peace
Rebels? In Egypt they were called 'protestors' and in Libya they are called 'rebels'? Why is that?
Where did I say the army was 'fighting for the rebels', or protestors? I said 'the army refused to kill the people' just as they did in Egypt.
As you are onto your normal twist and turn of words I will go get some work done, can't waste all day with someone with such little comprehension skills and lack of tollerance.
Posts: 15090 | From: http://www.egyptalk.com/forum/ | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
Wow Ayisha you really can't help yourself You love to twist peoples word to quell your ego. How was I "Twisting" your words??? You said that the Lybian Army refused to fire upon the protestors...That would mean they sided with the Protestors Yes No??
Rebels is what they call them on Aljazeera and other News information. Did not mean any disrespect just trying to understand what side the Lybian army is on. Is the Army just standing around doing nothing since they decided not to kill the "protestors"?? You think you know so much then it would be easy to post an article that is speaking about simply what the Libyan Army is doing.
Peace
Posts: 9651 | From: Reace and Love City. | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ayisha:In Libya the Army refused to kill the people
quote:King: So you have Proof that the whole Lybian army is fighting for the Rebels??
Ayisha: Where did I say the army was 'fighting for the rebels', or protestors? I said 'the army refused to kill the people' just as they did in Egypt.
quote:King: Wow Ayisha you really can't help yourself You love to twist peoples word to quell your ego. How was I "Twisting" your words??? You said that the Lybian Army refused to fire upon the protestors...That would mean they sided with the Protestors Yes No??
As in Egypt they knew the people had a right to protest, it was a legitimate protest. Nowhere have I said the 'whole Libyan army was fighting for the protestors', your 'assumptions' are based on your twisting of my words, obviously something to do with your ego, not mine. The difference is that in Egypt the government did not hire other killers, they tried using their own on Jan 28th which only resulted in the entire world seeing what that government was capable of in terms of dirty dealings. When the government is gone or going or obviously corrupt to that extent the next leader is the army, who were the ones that got rid of babaMu and babaMu and Egypt were in a totally different position globally to that of Libya. The army here are of the people, for the people and to protect the country from attack. Libya has a nutcase at it's head with no army backing so has used other killers from outside countries that have been trained as killers by Libya, paid killers, mercenaries. If this had happened in Egypt then things would have turned out differently and there would be blood flowing here as there is there. babaMu was 'out of touch' with reality, gaddafi is totally insane.
Posts: 15090 | From: http://www.egyptalk.com/forum/ | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
I see you are in ego boosting mode so I will just ignore your foolishness and ask you again WHAT IS THE ARMY IN LYBIA DOING??? Are they just watching from sidelines and cheering on the Libyan Protestors, or are they Actively defending the People from Ghadaffi??
It's simple Ayisha You should have proof that the Army who you claim refused to attack the people(Good Thing) are either supporting the people or Not. If the Army is not supporting Ghadaffi you must have a Article that told you this??
Peace
Posts: 9651 | From: Reace and Love City. | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
WHAT IS THE ARMY IN LYBIA DOING??? Are they just watching from sidelines and cheering on the Libyan Protestors, or are they Actively defending the People from Ghadaffi??
It's simple Ayisha You should have proof that the Army who you claim refused to attack the people(Good Thing) are either supporting the people or Not. If the Army is not supporting Ghaddafi you must have a Article that told you this??
Peace
Posts: 9651 | From: Reace and Love City. | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
Seems they are defecting and trying to keep their own lives after many have been executed for not following nutters orders to kill their own people.
With a little time and thought you could answer your own questions instead of trying for an argument with me. You have the internet, use it.
Now do have a good day, I have to work now.
-------------------- If you don't learn from your mistakes, there's no sense making them. Posts: 15090 | From: http://www.egyptalk.com/forum/ | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ayisha: Big difference King.
The obvious difference is one is an armed rebellion and the other was not. You are a simple propagandist.
Posts: 4254 | From: dasein | Registered: Jun 2009
| IP: Logged |
Don't give me that you wished me a "good" day nonsense. Why would you post the smile Emoticon if you really wished me a Good day?? Never will I fall for your cheap shots or your obvious ideas of attacking the poster and not the post. Your Insults which is the only thing you have will never intimidate nor stop me from asking you questions that you know you can't answer, Hence the reason for insults.
So tell me if the Miltary is defecting then how come Gaddafi is still in control of Half the country?? You think one article about Soldiers defecting will end what I asked You? Is the army in Libya that weak that they cannot reclaim the country for the "Protestors"?? We saw the Army in Egypt refuse to attack civilians and the people ousted there Pres in a Peaceful way. How come the Army in Lybia who You claim refuse to fire against Lybians cannot have the same effect?
So I ask you AGAIN what is the Lybian Army doing if they are as you say defecting does that meen they are fighting for the protestors? Is the Lybian army that weak that they cannot affect Lybia like the Egyptian Army?
Peace
Posts: 9651 | From: Reace and Love City. | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think the proposal that Gaddafi is controlling half of the country is pushing the bounds of believability...
Technically you can't call those from the army who have defected the Libyan army anymore til Mr G's crazy a$$ has been wiped out. So I guess you would have to term them the liberation front, or such like.
Egyptian Army is a whole different ball game. Egypt has 4 armys, all capable of fighting four separate wars, theoretically. It's chalk and cheese, comparison wise. Everyone knows Gaddafi has run down Libya's national army for fear of precisely this situation, whilst engratiating himself with numerous African nations to use their people as cannon fodder.
Posts: 1678 | From: New Egypt Forum - http://www.egyptalk.com/forum/ | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Libyan army's strength has to be seen in the context of sanctions and long isolation form the west. Unlike the Egyptian army, it did not get billions of dollars each year for thirty years. As an important client state in the region, the Egyptian army was built up with US money to neutralize an enemy of Israel: money will continue to flow so long as you keep the peace. America simply got tired of Mubarak, like they did Mobutu etc, told the army (they controlled) not to interfere with the anti-Mubarak protesters (since there will be no "change" anyway) but give the impression it was supporting a "democratic change". There will be no such thing in Egypt. America and Israel cannot afford it.
Posts: 4254 | From: dasein | Registered: Jun 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Err I dunno, think that one would need some research there. Egypt's army has always been pretty fierce. My grandpa would vouch for that too, god rest him. Oh, the irony there.
Let's not give the US too much of a pat on the back, you can't rewrite history after all.
America may have grown tired of Mubarak, but whose to say Egypt won't have another Saddat who'll grow tired of America too? There's plenty of money within Egypt itself, oil refineries and the like, so long as it isn't deviated into dictator's back pockets, who can say what they're capable of without a US baksheesh? Heck, the military runs on compulsory service at a pitance. The difference between Egypt and Libya is precisely as Ayisha spelled out. Egypt's military, is for the people, because IT IS the people.
Posts: 1678 | From: New Egypt Forum - http://www.egyptalk.com/forum/ | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeing: Libyan army's strength has to be seen in the context of sanctions and long isolation form the west. Unlike the Egyptian army, it did not get billions of dollars each year for thirty years. As an important client state in the region, the Egyptian army was built up with US money to neutralize an enemy of Israel: money will continue to flow so long as you keep the peace. America simply got tired of Mubarak, like they did Mobutu etc, told the army (they controlled) not to interfere with the anti-Mubarak protesters (since there will be no "change" anyway) but give the impression it was supporting a "democratic change". There will be no such thing in Egypt. America and Israel cannot afford it.
America didn't get tired of Mubarak, they and Israel were and are crapping themselves. They mumbled he should step down as they could see how it was going and wanted to try and stay on the 'right side', after all Egypt is a keystone in this area. America wants to play 'friends' with whoever is in power for their own agenda as you rightly implied in your final words, they cannot afford not to.
Egypt's army is not controlled by America, far from it. They can do without your money too thank you very much. If they need any they have other offers to consider but without theft in high positions this country has a hell of a lot of resources, it will be financially fine without 'military aid', or as Monkey put it, backsheesh. America will have to learn to accept there are changes going on here that could 'unbalance' those on high horses in all directions.
Posts: 15090 | From: http://www.egyptalk.com/forum/ | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Keep telling yourself that BS. He who pays the fiddler calls the tune. America got tired and embarrassed of the old man, they want a new lap dog, not democracy.
quote:They can do without your money too thank you very much.
Dont be a fool, for thirty years they eat up all that money and suffered the indignity of being Israel's bitch while she expanded and oppressed a fellow Arab people. Pretty fierce my ass. In all that time there was no military coup. Why do you think that was? If you weren't so naive and self-delusional you'd add it up and see whats happening. Like idiots suffering from post-Obama melancholy you will learn, THERE WILL BE NO CHANGE.
Posts: 4254 | From: dasein | Registered: Jun 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
I believe it was pointed out in a recent posting in some thread or another, that rebels detained or killed "blacks" even when they were aware that the captured folk were not combatants. Any truth to this?
Should this be true, along with reports of other targeted abductions and killings of both Libyan "black" and other African "blacks", presumably under the pretext of capturing "foreign mercenaries", then anti-government movement can no longer be objectively seen as a "revolution". Racist genocide or massacre would be a fitting title.
-------------------- The Complete Picture of the Past tells Us what Not to Repeat Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
Took the words right out of my Mouth....This was what I was trying to get accross to Ayisha who thinks it's "Okay" to kill Africans because some of them are mercenary.
If it's true that the Libyans are killing African Blacks simply because of being accused of being Mercenaries then it is racist genocide. Ayisha also attacked me for Calling the Lybians "Rebels" and not "Protestors". She seems to think that no army people are fighting for Gaddafi, that it's all African Mercenaries so she justifies the attacks on Blacks because of that.
Ayisha's issues are deeply in her and she tries to quell her ego by insults and disrespect....Hence the reason why she claims she wished me a good day with a Smilie Emoticon.
Peace
Posts: 9651 | From: Reace and Love City. | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
THE US SHOULD NOT INTERFERE IN WHAT'S GOING ON IN LIBYA!!!!!!!!!!!!
I had last night a pretty long conversation with my hubby who is retired US Army and at this time still continues to work to support military forces overseas. He's fed up that his country puts its nose very much into this issue.
2 ongoing wars are not enough for America? Truly the US can't afford another one yet at this time the US Government considers all kind of military intervention.
People who now call on to support Libya's 'anti-goverment forces' (others call them 'rebels') don't even know who they are and what's in their agendas. Yet they are considering to support them with arms. It seems like the US has not learned from the past.
On the other side there are many other countries in this world in which people are being oppressed by their own regimes, they are getting tortured and killed on a daily basis and no one gives a flying f#ck.
With all the money which is spend on invading third world/developing countries, battling wars, building these countries back up these billions of USD should be better used to fix internal problems within the US. The Obama administration needs to take care of its own people at first!!!
Let the UN and NATO fully deal with the crisis in Libya if they want to. Clearly the US should stay out of there. America has enough blood on its own hands already and needs to stop playing leading superpower.
End of story.
Posts: 30135 | From: The owner of this website killed ES....... | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
The Libyans are not rebels. They were initially pro-democracy demonstrators. They initially wanted more transparency, human rights and justice. The Mad Dog using brutal force illegitimately attacked unarmed pro-democracy protesters in Benghazi provoking a popular revolution. Revolutionaries is exactly what they are and to call them rebels proves lack of understanding of what a rebel is and what a revolutionary is. If the revolutionaries were merely a small contingent of people fighting the majority of the people and an authorized government they would be rebels.
The fact is they are not fighting the majority of Libya because they are the majority. Qadaffi has been reduced to his own regime protection forces and mercenaries. Qadaffi lost the confidence of many of his diplomats, government officials and most of all his people. It is a revolution of the people against a tyrant who is now seeking a safe way out of Libya for him, his family and cash. Posts: 2275 | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
Took the words right out of my Mouth....This was what I was trying to get accross to Ayisha who thinks it's "Okay" to kill Africans because some of them are mercenary.
I beg your pardon! Where the hell did you TWIST that from? NO it is NOT ok, don't you dare try putting your racist comments onto me.
quote:If it's true that the Libyans are killing African Blacks simply because of being accused of being Mercenaries then it is racist genocide.
are you insane?? People are killing people irrelevant of colour because they are at war you idiot.
quote:Ayisha also attacked me for Calling the Lybians "Rebels" and not "Protestors". She seems to think that no army people are fighting for Gaddafi, that it's all African Mercenaries so she justifies the attacks on Blacks because of that.
BS, I didn't attack you I asked WHY they were called rebels and not protestors and I have justified no attacks on anyone black, white or sky-blue pink with spots on! This is a serious TWIST of anything I said which is plain to see by anyone that can read.
quote:Ayisha's issues are deeply in her and she tries to quell her ego by insults and disrespect....Hence the reason why she claims she wished me a good day with a Smilie Emoticon.
Peace
I did wish you a good day, does a smile mean something different to you with your racists small minded issues king. Just like you slander and attack me and stick peace at the end of your posts, hypocrite.
Posts: 15090 | From: http://www.egyptalk.com/forum/ | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
Is this Not YOUR words?:Did you say this or is it my imagination?: Libya has a nutcase at it's head with no army backing so has used other killers from outside countries that have been trained as killers by Libya, paid killers, mercenaries.
Again ayisha YOUR words: Army refused to kill the people so the nutter shipped in a load from other African countries that will have no problems with mass killings, hence the Libyan people killing what you claim as 'any blacks' because they ARE the paid killers shipped in to do nutters killing for him. At this rate Libya will have no Libyans left, a head nutter and a mass of African killing machines. Someone needs to aim at this nutters third eye and fire.
Also is this not YOUR Words again: Rebels? In Egypt they were called 'protestors' and in Libya they are called 'rebels'? Why is that?
Nothing hypocritical of any thing I have said. The smile that you Used was the roll of the eyes. How can anyone not take it as you being sarcastic. You have deep seated issues that you really need to work out....For how long have I spoken with you and you still think your insults have ANY effect. Just have to laugh at you BAhahahhahaha. Really ayisha you start attacks on every person that has a different stance then you. Glad to see some things stay the same.
Also please post a post from me slandering you. Thanks
Peace
Posts: 9651 | From: Reace and Love City. | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
Is this Not YOUR words?:Did you say this or is it my imagination?: Libya has a nutcase at it's head with no army backing so has used other killers from outside countries that have been trained as killers by Libya, paid killers, mercenaries.
Again ayisha YOUR words: Army refused to kill the people so the nutter shipped in a load from other African countries that will have no problems with mass killings, hence the Libyan people killing what you claim as 'any blacks' because they ARE the paid killers shipped in to do nutters killing for him. At this rate Libya will have no Libyans left, a head nutter and a mass of African killing machines. Someone needs to aim at this nutters third eye and fire.
Notice it was YOUR claim about killing 'any blacks', not mine. The ONLY time I have used the word Black is when quoting YOU. I was trying to explain to the stupid about what's going on, but you cannot get past the skin colour. The racist comment was yours.
quote:Also is this not YOUR Words again: Rebels? In Egypt they were called 'protestors' and in Libya they are called 'rebels'? Why is that?
so where is that an 'attack' King, it's a QUESTION.
quote:Nothing hypocritical of any thing I have said. The smile that you Used was the roll of the eyes. How can anyone not take it as you being sarcastic. You have deep seated issues that you really need to work out....
The roll of the eyes was at the quote of yours which I didn't waste time replying to but wished you a good day. Sorry you are so wrapped up in your issues with ME that you missed that.
quote:For how long have I spoken with you and you still think your insults have ANY effect. Just have to laugh at you BAhahahhahaha. Really ayisha you start attacks on every person that has a different stance then you. Glad to see some things stay the same.
Again no attack from me but as nomal from you. It is impossible to have any sort of discussion with you without you twisting words, as has been shown here.
quote:Also please post a post from me slandering you. Thanks
There are plenty in this thread, I don't have time to waste finding things you demand.
Posts: 15090 | From: http://www.egyptalk.com/forum/ | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
The reports that I have seen, speak of targeting of "Blacks", Libyan or not. In fact some of these have already been posted in previous pages of this thread. Are we to assume that these are false statements, with images of "Blacks" - Libyan and not -- rushing to leave harassment and violence? I'm not hearing reports of "whites" -- Libyans or not, being selectively targeted, and their rushing out of the country as a result. It would be one thing if they simply attacked what is perceived to be "sub-Saharan blacks", but Libyan "blacks" are also targets of this.
As one poster already kind'a hinted on, in journalistic jargon, "rebels" seems to be a reference to "armed" opposition groups who may go in semi-organized gangs, rather than peaceful protesters whom may have lesser coordination amongst themselves.
-------------------- The Complete Picture of the Past tells Us what Not to Repeat Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
This is my words that you took offence too:Took the words right out of my Mouth....This was what I was trying to get accross to Ayisha who thinks it's "Okay" to kill Africans because some of them are mercenary.
In the next Paragraph I said IF African Blacks are being killed simply because they are African Blacks then it's genocide. This was your responce: are you insane?? People are killing people irrelevant of colour because they are at war you idiot.
I only mentioned African Blacks in the 2nd Paragraph because Explorer was saying that was what was happening in Lybia.
Unless I am mistaken Ayisha calling people Idiots, Stupid is a form of disrespect and attacks. You made the comments about mercenaries Read Again:
Army refused to kill the people so the nutter shipped in a load from other African countries that will have no problems with mass killings, hence the Libyan people killing what you claim as 'any blacks' because they ARE the paid killers shipped in to do nutters killing for him. At this rate Libya will have no Libyans left, a head nutter and a mass of African killing machines. Someone needs to aim at this nutters third eye and fire.
^Can you really post this and then claim that you were not defending violence against Africans?
Really Ayisha you have some deep seated issues you need to work out...All I ask is for you to keep it civil in your debates with others on these forums. Insults just stalls the Learning.
Peace
Posts: 9651 | From: Reace and Love City. | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
This is my words that you took offence too:Took the words right out of my Mouth....This was what I was trying to get accross to Ayisha who thinks it's "Okay" to kill Africans because some of them are mercenary.
In the next Paragraph I said IF African Blacks are being killed simply because they are African Blacks then it's genocide. This was your responce: are you insane?? People are killing people irrelevant of colour because they are at war you idiot.
I only mentioned African Blacks in the 2nd Paragraph because Explorer was saying that was what was happening in Lybia.
Do I say King you are wrong or do I say King you are a liar here?
YOU mentioned killing 'any blacks' before I even started posting in this thread to reply to you. I have NEVER said it is ok to kill 'any black' as you have SLANDERED me as saying, I was explaining to you WHO and WHY was killing WHO. You don't seem to grasp that.
quote:Unless I am mistaken Ayisha calling people Idiots, Stupid is a form of disrespect and attacks.
but you are being a stupid idiot if you can't see it was YOU who brought up killing 'any black' and I never mentioned it. So not meant as an insult but a fact.
quote:You made the comments about mercenaries Read Again:
Army refused to kill the people so the nutter shipped in a load from other African countries that will have no problems with mass killings, hence the Libyan people killing what you claim as 'any blacks' because they ARE the paid killers shipped in to do nutters killing for him. At this rate Libya will have no Libyans left, a head nutter and a mass of African killing machines. Someone needs to aim at this nutters third eye and fire.
yes King, read again, YOU claimed, not me, YOU claimed they were killing 'any blacks' I explained they were killing the mercenaries that were attacking them, I never mentioned colour as I am not obsessed with skin colour as you are.
quote:^Can you really post this and then claim that you were not defending violence against Africans?
Yes, It it clear to anyone who can read, except you it seems. issues mumkin?
quote:Really Ayisha you have some deep seated issues you need to work out...All I ask is for you to keep it civil in your debates with others on these forums. Insults just stalls the Learning.
Then stop twisting my words and insulting me.
Posts: 15090 | From: http://www.egyptalk.com/forum/ | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
I only mentioned African Blacks in the 2nd Paragraph because Explorer was saying that was what was happening in Lybia.
Remember King, I'm basing my claims on actual reports in news journals. I'm not making them up out of thin air.
Ps: I don't know what "revolutionaries" go around killing and/or abducting their working class colleagues. That is not revolutionary; that is reactionary!
-------------------- The Complete Picture of the Past tells Us what Not to Repeat Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
I respect your words. I KNOW you are not making anything up. I saw a Aljazeera report that spoke of these crimes.
Don't think I was trying to disrespect you that is not what I was trying to do. Just showing Ayisha that Lybia is not the revolution that was in Egypt.
Peace
Posts: 9651 | From: Reace and Love City. | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^Gotcha. I mean, if somebody is lying here, then it would have to be the news organizations churning out those reports. The question is, are they...lying?
-------------------- The Complete Picture of the Past tells Us what Not to Repeat Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
I respect your words. I KNOW you are not making anything up. I saw a Aljazeera report that spoke of these crimes.
Don't think I was trying to disrespect you that is not what I was trying to do. Just showing Ayisha that Lybia is not the revolution that was in Egypt.
Peace
I started posting in this thread with the words "Big difference King." telling YOU it was not the same as the revolution in Egypt and why. Posts: 15090 | From: http://www.egyptalk.com/forum/ | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
When I tried to open your link, It does not work. I admit that I said Lybians are killing Any Blacks. That was worded in my first post in this forum.
What I don't understand is how were you trying to say that THIS is correct thinking Your words again:the Libyan people killing what you claim as 'any blacks' because they ARE the paid killers So what am I to take from this quote of yours? Please tell me so I don't repeat that mistake.
Then you claim that the Lybians were killing mercenaries...Yet there is proof in this thread if you read some of it that they(Lybians) were attacking Any African that is Black...There were also reports from Aljazeera saying the same thing.
Also how have I insulted you Ayisha?? Unlike you If you feel I insulted you then I apologize. I'm not going to cling to any attacks and claim them as Fact.
Peace
Posts: 9651 | From: Reace and Love City. | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
When I tried to open your link, It does not work. I admit that I said Lybians are killing Any Blacks. That was worded in my first post in this forum.
Thank you! the link was to your first post on this page where you said it, not me.
quote:What I don't understand is how were you trying to say that THIS is correct thinking Your words again:the Libyan people killing what you claim as 'any blacks' because they ARE the paid killers So what am I to take from this quote of yours? Please tell me so I don't repeat that mistake.
What is so hard to understand from that King? The Libyans were defending themselves against the mercenaries who were attacking them.
quote:Then you claim that the Lybians were killing mercenaries...Yet there is proof in this thread if you read some of it that they(Lybians) were attacking Any African that is Black...There were also reports from Aljazeera saying the same thing.
Then why are you accusing me of saying this? You said they are killing 'any blacks', if the Lybians are in a state of war right now defending their lives and all they know is there are paid killers from other African countries trying to kill them, what are they supposed to do? Ask for ID first? No it is NOT ok to be killing 'any blacks' as you put it and I have NEVER said or implied it is, NONE of this is ok but they are in a position they don't know who is friend and who is enemy right now, I don't suppose they are wearing badges of identification, so if the other african countries have mercenaries killing Lybians then yes the Lybians will fight back whoever they see as the enemy. Logic.
quote:Also how have I insulted you Ayisha?? Unlike you If you feel I insulted you then I apologize. I'm not going to cling to any attacks and claim them as Fact.
By totally twisting my words and what I said you have insulted me and caused an argument. I will not sit back and let you do that, maybe I should and let you have a way of releasing some of your issues but sorry thats not me, you twist my words and I will say something, you know I will and that's why you do it.
I apologize sincerely if you feel I have insulted you in some parts and for actually insulting you in others.
For the record, no war, no killing, of ANYONE no matter what colour, race, religion, sex or planet they are from is 'ok' in my book and I resent that you think it would be. The Libyans are not fighting the same 'war' that Egypt or Tunisia have and that is down to the Mad Dog, not the Libyans, Americans or planet Mars. This nutter (Gadaffi, not King ) is killing his own people as a display of power, he is insane and needs to be stopped before anymore lives are lost, whatever colour they are or where they are from.
**Disclaimer, King that was a joke, not meant as an insult, please take it in the humour it was delivered in.
Posts: 15090 | From: http://www.egyptalk.com/forum/ | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
King, You make some useful points. If there was no support in Gaddafi's armed forces then his regime would have fallen by now.
There are many indigenous Africans in Kaddafi's forces; some are from Libya such as the Touaregs, Tebu, and Hausa. Others paying no attention to colonial borders simply cross over to Libya as they see fit.
Let's face it North Africans many of whom are settlers into Africa are known racists and they should watch out. One day they could be expelled from the continent as Idi Amin did to the settler Asians in Uganda. Since they call themselves Arabs they already have a place waiting for them: the Arabian peninsula.
Points to note: This very fascist reactionary movement began in Benghazi in Cyrenaica(long at loggerheads with Gadaffi for overthrowing the feudal monarch Idris--hence their quick resort to the colonial flag) and not in Tripoli--unlike the Egypt and Tunisia movements which began in the capitals.
The movement did not flare up spontaneously but was a mere copy-cat imitation of what happened in Tunis and Cairo.
The fact that Libya had to import so many workers to help develop the country shows that those who are now shouting and screaming in the streets were just idle people who lived off the largesse of the state.
Gaddafi has overstayed his time. 40 years is just too much. He should have established institutions so that his policies of socialism and Pan-Africanism continue[the degenerate settlers in the North are much opposed this] could continue. Putting his sons in key governmental positions is wrong. Maybe MK was hampered by the fact that Libya is just a colonial nailing together of 3 distinct regions just a few decades ago.
And this thing about "shooting your own people" is just bogus propaganda. The modern state as an instrument of force and repression has always done it. There were many killed in Egypt by Egyptian forces themselves. The big Security unit that the Egyptians have stormed and tried to take over was skilled in the torture and killing of those who threatened the state. All the Arab states of West Asia routinely kill "their own people".
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
RawyaRageh Rawya Rageh AJE says air traffic control in Cyprus & Malta can tell the #Gaddafi jets took off from #Libya in direction of Vienna, Athens, Cairo #Feb17 27 minutes ago
quote: he is insane and needs to be stopped before anymore lives are lost, whatever colour they are or where they are from.
Amazing after you say you are against killing of anyone you fail to mention that the Libyans taking up arms against the state (and hence supporters of Qaddafi) need to be stopped as well? Arent they going to kill more people after all? You are a hypocrite.
Posts: 4254 | From: dasein | Registered: Jun 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
CNN's Wolf Blitzer (former AIPAC worker) said EL Baradi was in the "fore front" of democracy movement in Egypt (!) and he will be running for president. Look out for this American stooge to "win" the next election. I said it before, THERE WILL BE NO CHANGE.
Posts: 4254 | From: dasein | Registered: Jun 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
But some of the Egyptians in the street at the height of their unrest said El Baradei is not wanted in Egypt.
Posts: 2118 | From: midwest, USA | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged |
I only mentioned African Blacks in the 2nd Paragraph because Explorer was saying that was what was happening in Lybia.
Remember King, I'm basing my claims on actual reports in news journals. I'm not making them up out of thin air.
Ps: I don't know what "revolutionaries" go around killing and/or abducting their working class colleagues. That is not revolutionary; that is reactionary!
Gaddafi was hiring West Africans who had worked in the petro/chemical industry to be mercenaries.
Problem with Gaddafi's choice is the West Africans had no problem go straight to the prodemocracy rebels to surrender and explain that it was either be a mercenary for Gaddafi or be shot at the border.
Gaddafi's mercenaries: Who are they, where are they from? Tripoli : Libya | Feb 26, 2011 By Gino C. Matibag
A mercenary is a person who fights or kills for money. They are sometimes referred to as "guns for hire," private armies, soldiers or warriors.
They have a long history going back all the way from the Middle Ages when Italians hired condottieri or Contractors, to King Henry II’s suppression of England rebellion in the 12th century, to modern era's America's private military contractors such as Blackwater or Xe, DynCorp and Triple Canopy.
When everything seems to be difficult to defeat Libya's strongman Moammar Gaddafi, there is an avenue that may be worth considering to pin him down: the mercenaries.
The country's army had turned away from him and joined the protesters, needless to say, it's natural that a Libyan will not attack and kill a fellow Libyan.
In a report by the ABC News, Gaddafi's mercenaries are black Africans, spoke French and were identified by wearing yellow hats.
"They are from Africa, and speak French and other languages," said Libya's emissary to India Ali al-Essawi who resigned this week.
Gaddafi employed foreign mercenaries who come from sub-Saharan states such as Chad, Congo, Mali, Niger, Sudan and even Eastern Europe, according to The Guardian.
However, Nairobi-based Thierry Vircoulon of the International Crisis Group said, "Congolese are not known to be very efficient soldiers or fighters. I’m not even sure there is such a thing as Congolese mercenaries on the market."
Vircoulon continued by saying that the Libyan leader developed a vast military network in the continent. Gaddafi is the only Arabic leader who had an African policy. There was even a time that the dictator dreamed of a United States of Africa--an acronym that would rival America's name.
Libya has long been supporting foreign militaries as explained by Vircoulon.
"The Libyan regime used to be a training area for a lot of rebel groups in the Sahel region," a place in North Africa. He has got a huge network of contacts across the continent…so that’s the reason why you have all these people who were actually very used to flying to Libya to get a bit of money and [go] back to their country. Even Nelson Mandela flew to Libya to get money in 1994."
War-torn countries have produced an ample supply of unemployed military and paramilitary personnel who are willing to do anything given the right price.
An Al Jazeera report mentioned that ads offering prospective mercenaries as much as $2,000 appeared in Guinea and Nigeria to come to the Libyan dictator, who has been shopping for private armies starting from West Africa, according to the NPR.
It is practical for the strongman to hire foreign contractors designed to kill. It is cheaper to hire them for a single, specific mission than housing and feeding the army--even with increased pay.
Mercenaries will also not hesitate to attack on people they share no country, tribal or social affinity.
According to reports, that is one reason why the military defected to the civilians--foreign armies firing on fellow Libyans angered the Libyan army.
Jose Luis Gomez del Prado, chairman of the UN Working Group on the use of mercenaries explained that there is no accountability with mercenaries whose goal is only for profit.
"Whereas if you are a foreigner and you have been recruited as a private soldier, you don’t have anything to lose. Except if Gaddafi doesn’t win, you will lose your job and your money."
Reports describe black, French-speaking troops but observers warn they could just be sub-Saharan immigrants in the army
* o o Share507 o Reddit o Buzz up
* David Smith in Johannesburg * guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 22 February 2011 18.28 GMT * Article history
Protesters chant anti-government slogans in Tobruk, Libya. Protesters chant anti-government slogans in Tobruk, Libya. Photograph: Asmaa Waguih/Reuters
There are widespread reports that Muammar Gaddafi has unleashed numerous foreign mercenaries on his people, in a desperate gamble to crush dissent and quell the current uprising.
Their origins vary according to speculation: Chad, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Niger, Mali, Sudan and possibly even Asia and eastern Europe.
The claims are hard to pin down but persistent. Ali al-Essawi, the Libyan ambassador to India, who resigned in the wake of the crackdown, told Reuters on Tuesday: "They are from Africa, and speak French and other languages."
He said their presence had prompted some army troops to switch sides to the opposition. "They are Libyans and they cannot see foreigners killing Libyans so they moved beside the people."
In a separate interview, Essawi told al-Jazeera: "People say they are black Africans and they don't speak Arabic. They are doing terrible things, going to houses and killing women and children."
Witness accounts seem to bear out the claims. One resident of Tripoli was quoted by Reuters: "Gaddafi obviously does not have any limits. We knew he was crazy, but it's still a terrible shock to see him turning mercenaries on his own people and just mowing down unarmed demonstrators."
Saddam, a 21-year-old university student in Bayda, claimed mercenaries had killed 150 people in two days. "The police opened fire at us," he said. "My friend Khaled was the first martyr to fall and seven others died with him.
"The next day, we were shocked to see mercenaries from Chad, Tunisia, Morocco speaking French attacking us ... We captured some of the mercenaries and they said they were given orders by Gaddafi to eliminate the protesters."
Amid the chaos gripping Libya, the volume of foreign mercenaries and much else remains confused. Some believe they could be veterans of civil wars in the Sahel and west Africa.
Ibrahim Jibreel, a Libyan political activist, told al-Jazeera that some had been in the country for months, based in training camps in the south, as if in anticipation of such an uprising. Others had been flown in at short notice, he said.
Some reports suggest white mercenaries have also been spotted fighting on Gaddafi's behalf. White South Africans who left the national army after the end of racial apartheid have been in demand for their expertise in various war zones, including Afghanistan and Iraq, but there is currently no evidence that any have joined the conflict in Libya.
Experts suggest that Gaddafi has plenty of options in the region. "He has traditionally had a network of skilled soldiers from all over west Africa," said Adam Roberts, author of The Wonga Coup, the story of a failed attempt by Simon Mann and other mercenaries to overthrow the president of Equatorial Guinea in 2004. "There are lots of Africans, particularly from west Africa or Sudan, who go to Libya because it's wealthier."
Mercenaries remain a potent weapon against civilian populations, despite the African Union's 1977 Convention for the Elimination of Mercenarism in Africa. Liberian civil war veterans have been hired by Ivory Coast president Laurent Gbagbo to terrorise protesters following his widely acknowledged election defeat.
Roberts added: "Gaddafi and other dictators tend to surround themselves with fighters who will be loyal to them rather than to a local faction. Foreign mercenaries are likely to be less squeamish about shooting at local people.
"They are likely to better trained – a small unit that can be relied upon. They might also have experience of fighting battles and therefore be more capable if push comes to shove."
The view was echoed by Reed Brody of Human Rights Watch. "It's hard to get your own people to shoot your own people," he said. "In this kind of situation, you can see why mercenaries would be an advantage because it's easier to get foreigners to shoot at Libyans than to get Libyans to shoot at Libyans."
Gaddafi can offer mercenaries what they want more than anything: money. Sabelo Gumedze, a senior researcher at the Institute for Security Studies (ISS) in South Africa, said: "Mercenaries are purely driven by profit. As long as they make money, they're going to do it, and leaders like Gaddafi have money at their disposal."
There is a constant supply of willing recruits, he added. "In Africa the process of demobilising rebels is poor. The only thing they know is how to fight. If someone can turn the barrel of a gun into profit, they jump at it. They have few other employment opportunities."
José Gómez del Prado, chair of the working group on the use of mercenaries at the UN human rights council, said: "You can find, particularly in Africa, many people who've been in wars for many years. They don't know anything else. They are cheap labour, ready to take the job for little money. They are trained killers."
Del Prado said he has heard the reports of mercenaries in Libya from a number of sources and is "very worried".
But some analysts urged against jumping to conclusions in Libya, noting that the country has a significant black population who may simply be serving in the regular army and could be mistaken for mercenaries. These include Chadians who sided with Gaddafi in his past conflicts with Chad and were rewarded with houses, jobs and Libyan citizenship.
The UN refugee agency (UNHCR) said yesterday it had received "alarming reports" that Libyans were turning on African refugees whom they accused of being mercenaries.
Issaka Souare, a senior researcher at the ISS's Africa conflict prevention programme, said: "In the south of Libya you do have people of sub-Sarahan origin, including Hausa speakers. Some might have integrated into the Libyan army and these would probably be among the first to be deployed. It will then be easy for people to say they are foreign mercenaries.
"People started talking about this issue on the third day, but I think Gaddafi should have had sufficient resources to deal with the protests before resorting to mercenaries. How long would it take Gaddafi to get mercenaries together and deploy them? Maybe a week. So I see it as unlikely at this stage, but it could happen if army defections continue."
posted
Yeah its too bad that West African guest workers are being recruited to be mercenaries for Gaddafi, but if they don't they are dead anyhow.
I somehow feel that the West African guest workers were recruited because of their "child soilder" background or they aren't allowed work visas without a military service possibly required by Libya. Hence Gaddafi was thinking ahead when he set the immigration policy for guest workers.
Its a shame. But I was listening to the BBC in which a Libya (not to be named) was making a phone call with a satellite phone within the ranks of the pro-democracy fighters. The Libyans were arresting West African mercenaries, who infact were surrendering and trying to explain that they had not killed any civilians.
A few more Libyans who called in to the BBC had stated the West African mercenaries who were killing weren't going after "rebels" but women and children in their homes. Most were quite young men, explaining why their killing resembles "child soldiers".
Really disgusting that Qaddafi made sure he had some mercenaries that are capable of this sort of thing.
Warning not for the faint of heart, these are gruesome images from youtube:
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic