posted
Well I saw it as high as 1,000,000 but the 800,000 figure is parroted quite a bit. Where did you get the lower figure of 500,000?
Posts: 2118 | From: midwest, USA | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
OK, let's look at the Rwanda civil war this way.
1) The U.S. killed approx. 3 million Vietnamese in 13 years. It had massive airpower and all kinds of weapons including chemical ones[ Agent Orange, etc.] They also almost a million men on the ground plus the South Vietnamese army. Plus, plus, etc.
2)That works out to be 230,000 killed per annum. Which means about 20,000 per month.
3) Now you mean to tell me that a Hutu rabble armed mainly with sticks, clubs and machetes could kill off in one month at least 200,000 people--almost the same as the U.S. with its massive killing power in one whole year? "Expletive deleted un-be-lievable".
Other empirical facts: 1) the Tutsis were some 8% of Rwanda's 6.9 million people in 1994. If the war killed off 800,000 people--mostly Tutsis as they say--then how in whoever's name are there any Tutsis alive today? No need to be mathematics genius the do the calculations here.
2) The Tutsis are now 15% of Rwanda. The President is Tutsi and the Tutsis have won all the elections since 1994. From where did they get the numbers to vote for Kagame?
Just asking folks.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Or similar kinds of low tech wars in the last 30 years.
The Algerian civil war: 200,000 killed in 10 years. That amounts to less than 4,000 people in 90 days. And that was a brutal throat slitting war interspersed with bombs and bullets from the government.
The Tamil Tigers war: some 80,000 to 100,000 people were killed over a 25 year period. That amounts to about 1,000 in 90 days.And that war was a pretty brutal affair with frequent suicide bombings and other kinds of bomb and bullet carnage.
Compare those numbers with the claimed 800,000 number for Rwanda in 90 days.
You gotta scratch your head!
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
The reason why this thing peddled in the white world has to do with the limbic/reptilian core of the white brain: there is the deep unconscious belief that when it comes to violence blacks are unstoppable--once they are sufficiently excited.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:The Tutsis are now 15% of Rwanda. The President is Tutsi and the Tutsis have won all the elections since 1994. From where did they get the numbers to vote for Kagame?
Thats because the war wasn't about "Hutus" versus "Tutsis". If you try to understand it that way you will get confused. It was about French-backed government supporters versus supporters of RPF, armed by the United States.
Grumman, I remember reading the 500,000 figure somewhere. I agree with Lamin though that its probably a lot less.
Posts: 4254 | From: dasein | Registered: Jun 2009
| IP: Logged |
1) The U.S. killed approx. 3 million Vietnamese in 13 years. It had massive airpower and all kinds of weapons including chemical ones[ Agent Orange, etc.] They also almost a million men on the ground plus the South Vietnamese army. Plus, plus, etc.
Of the heavy US impact there is no doubt, but the US did not kill 3 million Vietnamese. What credible sources do you have for this figure?
2)That works out to be 230,000 killed per annum. Which means about 20,000 per month. 3) Now you mean to tell me that a Hutu rabble armed mainly with sticks, clubs and machetes could kill off in one month at least 200,000 people--almost the same as the U.S. with its massive killing power in one whole year? "Expletive deleted un-be-lievable".
^^Not unbelievable at all. Hannibal and his African troops, along with troops of his Celtic, Iberian and Gallic allies slaughtered around 50,000 -60,000 Romans in one day at Cannae, using swords and spears. And that's just in on day, against trained fighting men, who were fighting back. (Goldsworthy 2001- The Punic Wars.)
In any event, the killing was planned for in advance and well organized. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- The killing was well organized by the government.[10] When it started, the Rwandan militia numbered around 30,000, or one militia member for every ten families. It was organized nationwide, with representatives in every neighborhood. Some militia members were able to acquire AK-47 assault rifles by completing requisition forms. Other weapons, such as grenades, required no paperwork and were widely distributed by the government. Many members of the Interahamwe and Impuzamugambi were armed only with machetes. Even after the 1993 peace agreement signed in Arusha, businessmen close to General Habyarimana imported 581,000 machetes for Hutu use in killing Tutsi, because at the time, machetes were cheaper than guns.[11]
# ^ "Leave None to Tell the Story: Genocide in Rwanda." Human Rights Watch. Report (Updated April 1, 2003) # ^ Diamond, Jared. "Collapse", Penguin Books, New York, NY, 2005, pp. 316 # ^ Mark Doyle, "Ex-Rwandan PM reveals genocide planning", BBC News, March 26, 2004 -------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other empirical facts: 1) the Tutsis were some 8% of Rwanda's 6.9 million people in 1994. If the war killed off 800,000 people--mostly Tutsis as they say--then how in whoever's name are there any Tutsis alive today? No need to be mathematics genius the do the calculations here.
Agree that the 800,000 figure bandied about by so many, may indeed by exaggerated. It would not be the first time that so-called "human rights" advocates exaggerated. We can see that in Libya now. But even a sharply reduced body count is sobering. The Red Cross, and a number of independent observers put the killings at about 500,000 Tutsi, out of a pre-genocide figure of around 650,000. There are hundreds of first hand accounts by survivors who lived through this hell. Their stories are real. See:
The limits of humanitarian intervention: genocide in Rwanda, By Alan J. Kuperman, 2001, pg 20 on Google Books.
-------------------- Note: I am not an "Egyptologist" as claimed by some still bitter, defeated, trolls creating fake profiles and posts elsewhere. Hapless losers, you still fail. My output of hard data debunking racist nonsense has actually INCREASED since you began.. Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
Don't know why you ares so quick to believe Eurocentric apologists like Jared Diamond[racist] and BBC hacks like Mark Doyle.
Don't know why you want to deny the extreme brutality and kill-toll of the U.S. invasion and war in Vietnam. The toll was 2-3 million as even the U.S. historians admit.
Now to Rwanda. First, you haven't addressed the question: if the the Tutsis were just 8% of Rwanda's 6.9 million population in 1994, and using the lowest number of 500,000 killed then explain how the Tutsis were able to win the war and drive the Hutus over to Goma in the Congo?Remember how the West characterised war: a genocide of the Tutsis.
Explain too why the Tutsi population in Rwanda is now some 15%+ of the population of some 8.5 million plus.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
You seem to have such faith in the "reportings" of all those white busy-bodies in Africa. What makes the Red Cross a paragon of truth in anything. They can lie and distort just as they fit.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:if the the Tutsis were just 8% of Rwanda's 6.9 million population in 1994, and using the lowest number of 500,000 killed then explain how the Tutsis were able to win the war and drive the Hutus over to Goma in the Congo?
Good point. As said, to see the war as "tribal" is buying into western (American) propaganda. And this is easy to sell since Africa is suppose to be tribal and irrational. Fact is, the RPF consisted of Hutus and Tutsis and same with Interahamwe.
Posts: 4254 | From: dasein | Registered: Jun 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
I wrote before that deep in the white mind--its reptilian limbic core--there is the reflex belief that associates blacks with extreme uncontrollable violence--hence the hysterical reporting re Rwanda--which leads white reporters writing about killings in Africa to replace the word "kill" with "slaughter", "tribal slaughter", "savage slaughter", "massacre", "tribal massacre", etc. This also leads to a massive ramping up of numbers that are usually just accepted.
The same limbic reflex action is also triggered at the mention of "rape". In the U.S. the historic mob reaction to such was the direct cause of brutal lynchings. See too the controversy surrounding the film Birth of a Nation.
See Malcolm Gladwell's book BLINK. The book also discusses the Implicit Association Test in which test takers test their subconscious racial preferences and biases when they are flashed black and white phenotypes.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
James Baker says (in response to stated UN goal of "protection of civilians") Qaddafi has "plenty" of support in the west. He also asks how is this UN goal going to deal with atrocities of the rebels.
It seems as people in high places start asking obvious questions (now the war isn't going their favor) and as this gets more complicated "monkey" and "exile" have been noticeably absent. lol
Posts: 4254 | From: dasein | Registered: Jun 2009
| IP: Logged |
Nah. This thread is a little lacklustre of late. It's turned into a race war/reptilian farce. Nothing to do with Libya anymore. Too many chips on too many shoulders.
Posts: 1678 | From: New Egypt Forum - http://www.egyptalk.com/forum/ | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
Don't know why you ares so quick to believe Eurocentric apologists like Jared Diamond[racist] and BBC hacks like Mark Doyle.
Don't know why you want to deny the extreme brutality and kill-toll of the U.S. invasion and war in Vietnam. The toll was 2-3 million as even the U.S. historians admit.
Now to Rwanda. First, you haven't addressed the question: if the the Tutsis were just 8% of Rwanda's 6.9 million population in 1994, and using the lowest number of 500,000 killed then explain how the Tutsis were able to win the war and drive the Hutus over to Goma in the Congo?Remember how the West characterised war: a genocide of the Tutsis.
Explain too why the Tutsi population in Rwanda is now some 15%+ of the population of some 8.5 million plus.
Lamin, it has nothing do do with "wanting to believe" Eurocentrists. It is a simple matter of being accurate factually. I again ask, what credible sources do you have for the claim that the US killed 3 million Vietnamese? Even official PAVN sources do not list so high a figure. Where are you getting this claim from? What "US Historians" admit this? Give a detailed citation of what and who? I see now you are waffling and are now saying 2-3million Vietnamese killed by the Americans. But again, I ask, what credible "US Historians" support your claim? I bet you can't because your claim is false. You have to be more accurate. The heavy negative US impact on Vietnam is well documented, and I don;t "deny" it. Play it straight man. You don't have to exaggerate - you lose nothing by respecting the facts.
Now to Rwanda. First, you haven't addressed the question: if the the Tutsis were just 8% of Rwanda's 6.9 million population in 1994, and using the lowest number of 500,000 killed then explain how the Tutsis were able to win the war and drive the Hutus over to Goma in the Congo?Remember how the West characterised war: a genocide of the Tutsis.
You keep shifting your claims every time you are called out on a falsehood. Above, you claimed the US killed 3million Vietnamese. When called on it, you fail to provide credible proof, but suddenly lower the figure to 2million "to" 3 million. But it still makes no difference, your claim is still false.
Now you are shifting your claims again. I already addressed how the 500,000 Tutsi killed could come out of a population of 6.9million, using your own 8% figure. Now you ask how the Tutsis could win. Easy.
The Tutsi RPF restarted their offensive, and took control of the country methodically by cutting off government supply routes and encircling Kigali. The RPF took control of Kigali on 4 July and the whole country by 18 July 1994. A coalition government was sworn in under a transitional constitution with Pasteur Bizimungu as President. --Dallaire, Roméo (2005). Shake Hands With The Devil: The Failure of Humanity in Rwanda. GoogleBooks
I highly recommend you look up the history of Rwanda before making a lot of sweeping claims, or false claims, like the 3million/2million claim above, that can't be backed up credibly.
Explain too why the Tutsi population in Rwanda is now some 15%+ of the population of some 8.5 million plus.
Think Lamin, think! If you had actually taken time to investigate the history instead of making these sweeping false claims, you would know that many Tutsi that had fled, were able to return. Also many Hutu fled Rwanda fearing retaliation as the Tutsi forces emerged victorious. Take some time to actually read and understand the facts.
-------------------- Note: I am not an "Egyptologist" as claimed by some still bitter, defeated, trolls creating fake profiles and posts elsewhere. Hapless losers, you still fail. My output of hard data debunking racist nonsense has actually INCREASED since you began.. Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
"Tutsi RPF" is false as there were Hutus involved. The RPF gained control of the country because the UN -who was suppose to act as a buffer between aggression of the RPF and the defending Interhamwe/government supporters - pulled out allowing the US-backed RPF to advance. The peace deal and the UN was very biased in favor of the RPF - logically as it is controlled by the US - and they were better armed than their French-backed enemies.
Posts: 4254 | From: dasein | Registered: Jun 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Whether the RPF had UN support is not the question. The RPF may have had some Hutu supporters but it was overwhelmingly Tutsi as numerous credible histories Calling it "Tutsi RFP" just as these histories do is perfectly valid. In fact their Hutu opponents considered the RFP to be mostly Tutsi.
-----------------------------------------
GoogleBooks # Interim governments: institutional bridges to peace and democracy? - Page 85 Karen Guttieri, Jessica Piombo - 2007 - 406 pages - Preview Rwanda, Arusha Accords, July 25, 1993: After repeated military success by the mostly Tutsi RPF in early 1993 and increasing international pressure, the Habyarimana government is forced to enter into peace negotiations in Arusha, ... books.google.com - More editions
#A question of loyalty: military manpower policy in multiethnic states - Page 171
Alon Peled - 1998 - 203 pages - Preview The final Arusha agreements contained detailed articles concerning the integration of Tutsi-dominated RPF guerrilla fighters .. books.google.com
#In God's name: genocide and religion in the twentieth century - Page 153
Omer Bartov, Phyllis Mack - 2001 - 401 pages - Preview 26 With the largely Tutsi RPF attacking the borders of the country, claims that the Tutsi still sought to subdue the Hutu gained credence, and Tutsi within Rwanda could be scapegoated as RPF agents, effectively diverting public ..
#Global television and the shaping of world politics: CNN, ... - Page 119
Royce J. Ammon - 2001 - 197 pages - Google eBook - Preview As the Tutsi RPF consolidated its hold on power inside Rwanda, Hutus in Rwanda feared revenge from the army that had quelled the mass killing of Tutsis. As a result, Hutus began pouring over the border into neighboring countries. ...
#Ecoviolence: links among environment, population and security - Page 214
Thomas F. Homer-Dixon, Jessica Blitt - 1998 - 238 pages - Google eBook - Preview A careful review of the evidence shows that ethnic affiliations became salient among the elite, because the predominantly Tutsi RPF threatened the regime's hold on power. Moreover, ethnic divisions were not the only cleavages in Rwandan ...
-------------------- Note: I am not an "Egyptologist" as claimed by some still bitter, defeated, trolls creating fake profiles and posts elsewhere. Hapless losers, you still fail. My output of hard data debunking racist nonsense has actually INCREASED since you began.. Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ethnic division was not the cause or even driving force for the conflict. I dont give a fuk what your "sources" say, to call it "Tutsi RPF" is misleading. The war was not tribal. It was between the US-backed rebels, Tutsi and Hutu, versus government supporters, Tutsi and Hutu.
Posts: 4254 | From: dasein | Registered: Jun 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Of course you would try to duck and dodge credible sources because your claim is false. Whether one side was "US backed" makes no difference in the fact that the Tutsi dominated the RPF. Since you disagree, provide credible proof of your claim that the RPF was not mostly Tutsi.
Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Zyonist Geraldo says he's glad to be back home and the Libyan "rebels" (those girls from Benghazi) are the worst group of fighters he has ever seen. LMAO!!!!
Exile and Monkey where are you please!!!
Posts: 4254 | From: dasein | Registered: Jun 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Notice too the line nowadays is "civil war". Before it wasn't a "civil war" but a popular "uprising", just as in Egypt, that would soon overthrow Qaddafi. It was to be understood as part of the sweeping "Arab renaissance" of democracy and transparency. What happened? LOL!
Posts: 4254 | From: dasein | Registered: Jun 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
I thought it turned into civil war when (a) the people came out in their masses to protest and (b) the army started firing on them Posts: 1678 | From: New Egypt Forum - http://www.egyptalk.com/forum/ | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
What does Muammar/Saif have in common with Revolutionaries/Opposition? They all agree that it is not a Civil War. I haven't read the word الحرب الأهلية الليبية even once in any reputable Arab press. The only mention is when the article is translated from western press. Verify this for yourself. Type “Libyan Civil War” in english and then in Arabic “الحرب الأهلية الليبية " one at a time in Google search and attest to this fact. It's a Western Media label, nothing more, nothing less.
Re: Arab Renaissance
We are literally in the first 4-5 months in, and what have we witnessed so far? Tunisia and Egypt to hold free elections in July and September, respectively. Citizens of those countries who only months ago couldn't go on radio and voice their concerns are no freely speaking without repercussions e.g. fear of disappearing.
Yemen is literally on the verge getting rid of Saleh and paving the way for free elections. The hijacked momentum of the unity proclamtion may actually bear fruit once the tyrant is gone. It may or may not, the point is there is hope, a precious word that was non-existent in the Arab world prior to Jan-2011.
Morocco King Mohammad has publicly announced that Morocco will begin a process to transform it a Constitutional monarchy. You know what that means, free elections, when was the last time that Moroccans voted. This is a nation where it was forbidden to slaughter a lamb on Eid, before the King did it first on state tv.
Algeria has lifted the brutal Emergency Law.
Syria has publicly stated that they would change the constitution to allow for more than just the Ba'aath party. There are hopes that the Emergency Law will also be lifted. Syrian Kurds for the first time in their lives have been granted Syrian citizenship.
Saudi Arabia has issued more than 150 Billion dollars to it's citizens from raises to free housing, etc. Money that otherwise would have been embezzled out the country. There is hope for more freedoms including elected officials.
Jordan is on the path to meaningful elections in which the people will freely elect the Prime Minister of their choice and this is unprecedented as previously the King elected the PM and ensuing government. To date Unions have been allwoed to form e.g. teacher's unions. The law for free and public gathering is in full effect.
Libya, well look at where we are now, it is only a matter of time, and that's all it is, a matter of time. Does anyone seriously believe it will revert to Qadaffi's mad rule?
All of this has happened in the last few months. Before this the Arab World was literally gripped with an iron fist. If the year ended today, what transpired above would suffice for the year or 2 or even 3. The “change” has begun however, there is no reverting to the pre-2011 Arab world. Posts: 2275 | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well of course Muammar isn't going to see it as a "civil war", he already branded the Benghazi girls "terrorists" connected to al qaeda... and the girls for their part are not going to see "civil war" either, they are going to try and sell it as a peoples revolution like in Egypt. Not even close.
As for your "renaissance". The US client states, the most important ones to watch: there are still reports of abuse from Egyptian military, no change. Hard to see corrupt military elite giving up forty years of billion dollar aid without a fight. Jordan - only promises. Morocco the same. Yemen no way, dont see it. and Saudi Arabia isn't even promising shyt. LOL!
There might be change in the ME but it will take much more than facebook nerds and romantic notions of "people power".
Posts: 4254 | From: dasein | Registered: Jun 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
"Gadhafi declared he would show 'no mercy' to his own people," President Barack Obama said in his address to the nation the other night, explaining that he decided to attack Libya to avoid a civilian blood bath.
He's not the first president, and likely not the last, to call America to war by using such language. There is a high-minded moral tone to it — the same tone that both presidents named Bush used as they declared their wars in Iraq.
"What I am opposed to is a dumb war," said a tall, angular, young Illinois politician gaining a reputation as a great debater. "What I am opposed to is a rash war.
"What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt … of weekend warriors in this administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and hardships borne."
Many fighters in Ajdabiya wearing brand-new desert military boots they say were supplied by #Qatar. #Libya http://twitter.com/#!/bencnn
Furthermore:
As previously noted here, opposition fighters now have French-made MILAN anti-tank missiles. Source unknown. #Libya http://twitter.com/#!/bencnnPosts: 30135 | From: The owner of this website killed ES....... | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
The emir wants to spread democracy in the region. As "Exxxiled" would say, "props" should go out to those freedom-loving sheiks. lol
Posts: 4254 | From: dasein | Registered: Jun 2009
| IP: Logged |
Only fools and the racially anguished could have been taken in by Barack Obama. The man was tailor-made of 21st century America. A promoted fraud with a relatively weak intellect--contrary to the white liberal notion that he's smart.
It was that kind of face that the powers that be in white America were looking for to take the imperialist war to Africa. It's that kind of face that would put a smiley on Africom. Now the weakminded jackass joins with dwarf Sarkozy and condom-head(that's the term the British Guardian uses for him) Cameron to bomb an African nation. These 3 clowns are so simple-minded as to write a letter to the white European media with the message the "Gaddafi must go". The reason for this childish approach is just a very transparent ploy that the white Euro-American media should step up its propaganda.
But the big question is this: who planned it so that this weak-minded nonentity should become President of the U.S. only to be the instrument of the Jews and white America's programme for Africa in the new millenium?
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
A key question is this: Who is going to get what shares of the oil revenues? One person’s take on this appears in this blog. A Venezuelan who was inside the process and saw how the State diverted oil revenues to itself and industrial projects addresses Libyans and tells them:
Citizens of Libya
Give yourselves a fighting chance to become real citizens in your own country. Demand for the oil revenues to be paid out to you directly. If you so wish, you can then later hand it over to your government in taxes… but at least that way you make it clearer to your government that it works for you. http://theoilcurse.blogspot.com/2011/04/citizens-of-libya.htmlPosts: 1365 | Registered: Dec 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well at least they have something in common with the failed Libyan saboteurs, given the fact that they too failed to undermine their government even with help from Bush II. Posts: 4254 | From: dasein | Registered: Jun 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Jalal Talabani kills 34 people at Ashraf. US, France, UK and Qatar should go in and stop him from "killing his own people!!!" I mean this is unacceptable! Opps, sorry, they were Iranians...still they should stop him from "killing other people!!!" Posts: 4254 | From: dasein | Registered: Jun 2009
| IP: Logged |
Even though there are no signs that Muammar Qaddafi is ready to leave power, or that there is a rebel leader who can be a credible successor, the Obama administration and its allies are quietly looking around for a place where the Libyan leader can live out his sunset years. The whole effort is made more complicated by his likely indictment by the International Criminal Court in the Hague for the bombing of PanAm Flight 103 in 1998, as well as human rights violations inside Libya, reports the New York Times. Officials are looking at the possibility of finding a country that has not signed the Rome Statute forcing nations to abide by the international court's rulings. That won't be as hard as it sounds since around half of the African countries have not signed the treaty, which the United States has also refused to do. The search is part of a White House effort to push for regime change without putting boots on the ground. Separately, the NYT also reports that rebels say they are receiving arms from abroad. Even though Qatar has publicly said it would be willing to arm rebels, the fighters refuse to confirm where the weapons are coming from or give details about when or how they might have arrived. On Thursday though, the emir of Qatar told CNN "that deliveries of antitank weapons might have already reached them."
Can't see that Gaddafi will voluntarily leave his home anytime soon or infact ever.
Posts: 30135 | From: The owner of this website killed ES....... | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
These Benghazi fascist rebels have broken a record. It's the first time in history that a so-called rebel movement has sought arms and support from 3 imperialist, bloody-murder nations at the same time. Which, of course, proves that they are not a genuine rebel movement.
These silly boys who fight as if they had on burquas are just so astoundingly stupid--except when it comes to slaughtering African workers in Libya.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by lamin: These Benghazi fascist rebels have broken a record. It's the first time in history that a so-called rebel movement has sought arms and support from 3 imperialist, bloody-murder nations at the same time. Which, of course, proves that they are not a genuine rebel movement.
These silly boys who fight as if they had on burquas are just so astoundingly stupid--except when it comes to slaughtering African workers in Libya.
They are not only fascists, but also members of Bin Ladins, supported by the Saudis.
Posts: 2198 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
-------------------- Note: I am not an "Egyptologist" as claimed by some still bitter, defeated, trolls creating fake profiles and posts elsewhere. Hapless losers, you still fail. My output of hard data debunking racist nonsense has actually INCREASED since you began.. Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
-------------------- Note: I am not an "Egyptologist" as claimed by some still bitter, defeated, trolls creating fake profiles and posts elsewhere. Hapless losers, you still fail. My output of hard data debunking racist nonsense has actually INCREASED since you began.. Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
It seems that the rebels have decided that they need "Western" intervention to win this civil war and it looks like the west is happy to help.
Ask yourself why Libya and not Yemen or Syria?? It seems the west is biased against Gaddafi and want him out at all costs.
Also I use to support the rebels in Libya, but after reading about how they treated the African workers I realized this was no revolution and saw that these ignorant Libyans are only out for blood....If they were peaceful like the Egyptians then I would support them but killing African workers shows them to be racist and they seem to be taking out there anger against Gaddafi by killing innocent people...Also I watch Aljazeera news and really don't like to see children being used as pawns in this fight. Hopefully this war ends soon.
Peace
Posts: 9651 | From: Reace and Love City. | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I do not think no one on this forum, you would find someone who supports Qadafi. Let us make clear. Qadafi is a son of a bitch, and he has blood on his hands - both in his country and his many mercenary assistances to neighbouring countries.
Posts: 2198 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
This "Arab Spring Revolution" was so beautiful, like a dream, that lasted just few seconds, until these Benghazi fascists turned it into a nightmare.
Posts: 2198 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Putting your money where your mouth is: In strict material terms Gaddafi gave serious support to the ANC. While the U.S., Britain, and Israel were supporting the Apartheid regime Gaddafi was doing the opposite. Mandela had to say thanks. Gaddafi helped the IRA against English settler imperialism in Northern Ireland. Gaddafi was instrumental in getting OPEC started so that the U.S. and the West pay more than a few sou for a barrel of black gold. Gaddafi was instrumental in getting the AU morphed over into the AU. One of the few African states not to sign on to AFRICOM.
Lockerbie? Many say it was Iran that did it but blame was passed over to Libya.
In his war with Western imperialism Gaddafi fought fire with fire. OK some noses were bloodied but every Western leader has blood on his hands. Even the Turkish ones in their fight with the Kurds.
Casting stones is not for sinners.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
And Libya's metrics: Gini coefficient, life expectancy, literacy rate, gender equality, health and QLI? Gaddafi and Castro. Any comparisons?
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Photojournalist and filmmaker Tim Hetherington, director and producer of the documentary film “Restrepo,” and photojournalist Chris Hondros were were killed in the Libyan city of Misurata on Wednesday when the group of four photojournalists were attacked.
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic