Gaddafi ordered Viagra-like sex drugs for mass rapes in Libya: ICC prosecutor

[IDemo]

Source: rawstory

By Agence France-Presse
Wednesday, June 8th, 2011 -- 6:48 pm

UNITED NATIONS — Investigators have evidence that Libyan leader Moamer Kadhafi ordered mass rapes and bought containers of sex drugs for troops to attack women, the chief ICC prosecutor said Wednesday.

Luis Moreno-Ocampo said he may ask for a new charge of mass rape to be made against Kadhafi following the new evidence. The chief International Criminal Court prosecutor is expecting a decision from judges within days on his request for crimes against humanity charges against the Libyan leader.

"Now we are getting some information that Kadhafi himself decided to rape and this is new," Moreno-Ocampo told reporters.

He said there were reports of hundreds of women attacked in some areas of Libya, which is in the grip of a months-long internal rebellion.

Read more: http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/06/08/gaddafi-ordered-viagra-like-sex-drugs-for-mass-rapes-in-libya-icc-prosecutor/

[Poll_Blind]

1. This is the The Kuwaiti Incubator Baby Hoax all over again.

The story is from a tabloid, repeated by the US for political purposes. From 4/28/11 at DU, when it originally "broke": U.S. says Gaddafi troops raping, issued Viagra: envoys

From RawStory: Intel Agencies: ‘No evidence’ of Viagra-fueled Libyan rape campaign

Where....did this bullshit story come from? The Daily Mail, a British tabloid.

Isn't it bad enough that rapes certainly are occurring, without making shit up which throw reports of the actual crimes into doubt?

PB

[TexasProgresive]

2. AMEN!! n/t

[Name removed]

4. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Cerridwen]

6. First reported, Mar. 28, 2011 - Al Jazeera. One month prior to daily mail

sensationalistic claptrap.


Rape used 'as a weapon' in Libya
Doctors in city of Ajdabiya say pro-Gaddafi forces have used rape as a "weapon of war".
Last Modified: 28 Mar 2011 05:22

I apologize if you think Al Jazeera is in some way more slanted than disinfodotcom quoting the daily mail.

Rape by gaddafi forces had been reported previous to this. This was the earliest I could find that mentioned viagra.

[Poll_Blind]

8. No media, in any form, is outside the realm of manipulation.

In fact, and I am something of an amateur fan of how information/disinformation spreads, this sort of thing is not entirely surprising. The Bush Years were the best for honing this kind of thing- specifically referring to disinformaiton: I'd take the resolution of some "story" and then work backwards to find out not just how it broke, but how individual elements of it might have coalesced, been subtly altered, respun/repeated. Terribly time consuming process. Wrote about a few things I found using the process on DU over the years.

That was back when I believed the next administration after Bush's would punish his crimes.

PB

[Cerridwen]

13. If you'd been watching this from day one, you would have (edited)

recognized, since you're such a fan, that this was reported long before April and you'd know that very few people have been giving any credence to anything the daily mail says with regard to anything but even less so with what's happening in Libya.

The people on this board and on others I've read who are reporting about Libya, have proceeded very cautiously precisely because of the kind of crap you mention.

The only ones taking the words of Libyan state tv or daily mail or fox are those trying to make a case that doesn't stand without the questionable 'news' provided for those sources.


eta: I'm not a huge fan of rawstory either. Just for the record, as it were.

[joshcryer]

23. Are you accusing Al Jazeera of being manipulated?

[PurityOfEssence]

49. Qatar. They are a quasi-governmental voice of Qatar. I accuse them of manipulating..

They're the only Arab country providing armed forces to this adventure and they got themselves appointed as brokers of the oil for the Insurgents.

Al Jazeera's reportage has been very skewed in this whole affair, so they're not clean.

None of this is news.

Do you hold Al Jazeera as an impartial commentator in this episode?

[joshcryer]

78. I believe that Al Jazeera and CNN's interviews with witnesses, along with HRW...

...and various rape focused groups show us a fuller picture. But I do not think that Al Jazeera's initial reporting on the matter was misplaced, misguided, or manipulated in any particular way, it was early, still, and indeed, Susan Rice ignorantly went with it as proof (at the time there was no proof when she said it, watch Al Jazeera's interview, it's very impartial as far as "may be" or "alleged" is concerned).

As it stands now we have hundreds of witnesses, the International Criminal Court will make the case effectively, I think, and when the evidence is laid out there I'm sure no one will dispute it really, except to slander the rebels for "similar behavior."

[PurityOfEssence]

109. Yes, we're aware that you believe, and we're aware that you're sure

The whole thing just reeks of propaganda. What good would it do him to have his people raping as policy? It would just inflame the insurgents more and it certainly wouldn't sway any undecideds to his side; it makes no sense.

What DOES make sense, whether we're correct or not, is the impression that many of us have of this being most beneficial to the allies and the insurgents. Maybe you guys are right, but the sources are so compromised and the shrillness of the claim so over-the-top that many of us don't believe there necessarily is a wolf there...

Al Jazeera has forever tarnished its image with the reportage of this little morally upright war.

[TheWraith]

10. "throw reports of the actual crimes into doubt" -- You mean like you're doing right now?

Dismissing anything nasty as a hoax, or propaganda?

[Poll_Blind]

11. No, just the Viagra-fueled rape army part. Nice try, though.

:hi:

PB

[TheWraith]

15. So the International Criminal Court is, what, a tool of the imperialist lackey running dogs? nt

[Poll_Blind]

17. That's just more shit you're making up, actually.

:shrug:

PB

[TheWraith]

27. Explain how you blow off the fact that the International Criminal Court treats this story seriously.

[Cerridwen]

19. What exactly is your argument? There was no rape, there was no

order given or there was no viagra provided?

If no rape; are you saying the doctors lied or the women? I watched several videos in the early days. Who was lying?

I watched videos of several reporters as well; reporting after having spoken to the doctors and women. The reporters lied on behalf of the doctors who lied on behalf of the women?

When reports came out about some of the torture the men experienced from gaddafi's forces, were those lies too? Electric shocks to their genitals? Lies? Have you seen those reports?

Did you believe the reports of torture? Did you see the videos of the mangled and dismembered and sliced up bodies? Is it only rape that you're having an issue with?

[Poll_Blind]

20. You really haven't bothered to read anything else I've written in this thread, have you?

:shrug:

PB

[Cerridwen]

22. Not understanding your argument, doesn't mean I haven't read it.

It just means you haven't made one that is comprehensible.

That would be, why I asked you what your argument is. It's called clarification. It's part of discussion.

The other questions were because I was wondering if you're having such an issue believing that gaddafi's troops have tortured their prisoners.

Not difficult. That's why I asked questions.

[TheWraith]

28. You haven't argued anything other than to dismiss all the reports as lies.

Maybe if you had something to say, people would listen.

[Kurska]

80. You know what you said, now either clarify, defend your statement as is, or reject it

It is not up to us to play mind reader for your trivialization of rape, you're on a public forum and if you're going to make a statement and then throw your hands into the air going "YOU JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND" I don't see why you posted in the first place.

[yurbud]

87. the viagra detail is what pushes it over the edge into WAG THE DOG territory

the PR people couldn't be happy with a credible epidemic of rape, it had to be an planned, viagra-fueled one.

Most guys young enough to be in the army can get a hard on from bumping into a doorknob--they don't need no stinking viagra.

[JJW]

3. Psych-ops

Heard it all before. Looks like another war. We will all be on skid row to pay the Chinese back for loaning us money for our oil wars.

[BadGimp]

84. my first reaction to the headline was about the same

sounds like someone wants to make a case for escalation...

Remember the 91 Iraq invasion? "Babies removed from incubators"?

I hope I am wrong.

[ronnie624]

102. You're not wrong.

Whether the basic facts are true or not, the article is part of the propaganda campaign for manufacturing consent for U.S. intervention.

[Dokkie]

5. I dont know about you guys

But I am not just going to have sex because I have an erection. You have to remove your thinking cap to believe something like this is even possible. Men may be ordered to kill, but they cannot to be ordered to have multiple sexual intercourse with women they do not know and probably not attracted to

Put this in the category of war propaganda and move on.

[Cerridwen]

7. If you can't tell the difference between sex and rape,

you have other issues.

[Odin2005]

9. Ignorant, dumb, post.

Rape is a UNIVERSAL occurrence in war zones.

[Turborama]

12. The Guardian: Gaddafi faces new ICC charges for using rape as weapon in conflict

Chief prosecutor investigates evidence of sexual attacks on women as Britain tells Nato: you must do more
Ed Pilkington, Xan Rice, Chris Stephen, Richard Norton-Taylor | Thursday June 09 2011

The chief prosecutor of the international criminal court (ICC) is likely to add rape to the war crimes charges against Muammar Gaddafi on the back of mounting evidence that sexual attacks on women are being used as a weapon in the Libyan conflict.

Luis Moreno-Ocampo told reporters at the UN in New York last night there were strong indications that hundreds of women had been raped in the Libyan government clampdown on the popular uprising and that Gaddafi had ordered the violations as a form of punishment.

The prosecutor said there was even evidence that the government had been handing out doses of Viagra to soldiers to encourage sexual attacks. Moreno-Ocampo said rape was a new tactic for the Libyan regime. "That's why we had doubts at the beginning, but now we are more convinced. Apparently, decided to punish, using rape."

Full article: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jun/08/gaddafi-forces-libya-britain-nato

[msanthrope]

14. Oh, I can't wait for the rape-apologia to begin.....

Because we all know that people the PL support simply do not rape women.

Ask Roman Polanski.

Ask Julian Assange.

Ask DSK.

Ask Mommar Kadhafi. I mean, anyone who named a stadium after Hugo chavez can't rape women, right????

Jeebus, what a rollcall of losers....

[mazzarro]

18. So your basis for believing this crap is that Ghaddafi named a stadium after

Hugo Chavez. I guess Hugo Chavez is the biggest authoritarian in the modern era - so Ghaddafi naming a stadium after him must be as evil as Chavez?
Pure unadulterated b*llsh*t - just like the Iraq and baby incubator crap they sold the other war with!

[joshcryer]

41. Reread what they wrote.

Chavez, being all good and wonderful, and his ties to Gaddafi, means that Gaddafi himself must be all good and wonderful and therefore incapable of ordering rape. (Nevermind that one of his head guards came out and denounce Gaddafi for raping both boys and girls, after telling his guards to go find whoever he saw on the street.)

[msanthrope]

51. No, my basis is a rather disturbing BBC report--

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-13705854


That the Venn diagram of A=Chavez supporters and B=Khaddifi rape apologists has an intersection nearly indistinguishable from its union is a rather interesting statement on the PL, though.

[No Elephants]

91. Was Assange convicted of rape?

[Octafish]

100. And his accusers were on the CIA Approved Vendors list.

Gee. That must mean the world's biggest Viagra order since Rush Limbaugh went to the Dominican Republic is legit. Just like the war on Libya.

[LanternWaste]

97. I imagine less than a few people may find

I imagine less than a few people may find the naming of a stadium relevant to alleged war crimes... :shrugs:

However, if it allows us to more easily conflate two separate and distinct concepts into one, easier-to-advertise-our-slogan, I can see why it may happen.

Allow me to try-- "Rape is horrible, so is Friday night television". Hmmmm... I don't get quite the same visceral satisfaction, but if I practice at it... maybe one day.

[Turborama]

16. Rape has accompanied warfare in virtually every known historical era

Rape has accompanied warfare in virtually every known historical era. The Greek and Roman armies reportedly engaged in war rape, which is documented by ancient authors such as Homer, Herodotus, and Livy. Ancient sources held multiple, often contradictory attitudes to sexual violence in warfare. Rape in the course of war is mentioned multiple times in the Bible: "For I will gather all the nations against Jerusalem to battle, and the city shall be taken and the houses plundered and the women raped..." Zechariah 14:2 "Their little children will be dashed to death before their eyes. Their homes will be sacked, and their wives will be raped."Isaiah 13:16

From this enormous Wikipedia article on War Rape: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_rape

This has nothing to do with incubators, unfortunately for the victims (and the denialists), rape has been and still is a common weapon used in war.

Most recently in Congo and Sudan...

Congo: http://www.google.com/search?num=100&hl=en&safe=off&rls=com.microsoft:en-US&q=rape+weapon+congo&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=

Sudan: http://www.google.com/search?num=100&hl=en&safe=off&rls=com.microsoft:en-US&q=rape+weapon+sudan&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=

[bemildred]

21. Right.

:sarcasm:

[Cerridwen]

24. No rapes happened? No order was given? They weren't given viagra?

Which is your point?

[bemildred]

25. I find this questionable.

That's my point.

I have no opinion as to what the facts are yet, Ghadaffi is well established to be an idiot, an asshole, etc., however from a legal standpoint it is going to be a tall order to prove what is alleged in the headline. Also it seems questionable to me that hardons and focusing on raping women would improve the military effectiveness of his troops. It's like taking a shit, it decreases your "readiness" when you are raping someone. It sounds like propaganda. Even if it's true, it's propaganda, Ghadaffi's propaganda.

I don't have a problem if they hang his ass with this, but I am not about to swallow it whole just yet either. If that ruins your day, I'll just have to live with that.

[BOG PERSON]

26. agreed

[Cerridwen]

29. Do you believe he tortured prisoners? Or that his troops have

tortured prisoners before killing them? Is it just rape that you're having a hard time believing? An insane dictator wouldn't even order his men to rape? Men don't rape in a war? There is no rape in a war?

Yes, of course, saying "right" sarcastically means you have "no opinion." Of course it does.

Ruin my day? My, what an opinion you have of yourself.

[bemildred]

32. Yes, yes, no, no, no, no, yes, yes.

It's a pleasure to meet someone so modest and reasonable as yourself.

[Cerridwen]

35. Reasonable? I can be. Given a good, well-thought and presented

argument and facts to back it.

Modest? Naw. Hardly ever been accused of. No, give me a second...nope, only been accused of that once and it had nothing to do with my attitude.

If I tracked your answers correctly, you believe rape happens in war just not in this particular instance?

I can come to all kinds of conclusions based on that alone. Perhaps you'll disabuse me of my assumptions and just tell me why you don't think so in this instance?

[bemildred]

36. Yawn.

"I have no opinion as to what the facts are yet, Ghadaffi is well established to be an idiot, an asshole, etc., however from a legal standpoint it is going to be a tall order to prove what is alleged in the headline. Also it seems questionable to me that hardons and focusing on raping women would improve the military effectiveness of his troops. It's like taking a shit, it decreases your "readiness" when you are raping someone. It sounds like propaganda. Even if it's true, it's propaganda, Ghadaffi's propaganda.

I don't have a problem if they hang his ass with this, but I am not about to swallow it whole just yet either. If that ruins your day, I'll just have to live with that."

[Cerridwen]

37. Yes. Obviously. No opinion whatsoever.

bemildred
Response to Original message
21. Right.

:sarcasm:

[bemildred]

44. If that does not make it clear, I doubt that continuing this "discussion" would improve on it. nt

[Cerridwen]

47. When you fall off your high horse, be careful he doesn't kick you in the head.

I've heard it can be quite a painful experience.

[bemildred]

50. If you cannot read and understand what that means, I don't see why there is any hope that

restating it in some other form will do the job.

[Cerridwen]

52. If you cannot present your argument...why bother posting it.

You've "yawned" posted a "sarcasm" smilie...easier than actually typing something that might explain your viewpoint of not having a sarcastic or tired?/bored? opinion.

Why do you bother? It's a rhetorical question. A rhetorical question is

A rhetorical question is a figure of speech in the form of a question posed for its persuasive effect without the expectation of a reply.

Here is the link: here is the link, you click here for the link to the information

I hope you'll forgive me...that is as s.l.o.w...a.s...I...c.a.n...t.y.p.e.

[bemildred]

53. I did post my argument, you failed to understand it. nt

[Cerridwen]

55. You failed to present your argument. n/t

[bemildred]

57. Yawn. nt

[Cerridwen]

59. Additional proof. Nice.

[bemildred]

54. What is the problem? Do you hate critical thinking? nt

[Cerridwen]

56. Let me know when you show evidence of critical thinking. n/t

[bemildred]

58. Shall I tweet you? nt

[Cerridwen]

60. Are you sure you know how?

[bemildred]

62. Can you afford to take the chance that I don't? nt

[Cerridwen]

63. Are you threatening me? Really? Tweet the whole subthread.

Gaddafi ordered Viagra-like sex drugs for mass rapes in Libya: ICC prosecutor

---------------

Your reply:

Right. :sarcasm:

--------------

My reply:

No rapes happened? No order was given? They weren't given viagra?

Which is your point?

------------

Your reply:

I find this questionable.

That's my point.

I have no opinion as to what the facts are yet, Ghadaffi is well established to be an idiot, an asshole, etc., however from a legal standpoint it is going to be a tall order to prove what is alleged in the headline. Also it seems questionable to me that hardons and focusing on raping women would improve the military effectiveness of his troops. It's like taking a shit, it decreases your "readiness" when you are raping someone. It sounds like propaganda. Even if it's true, it's propaganda, Ghadaffi's propaganda.

I don't have a problem if they hang his ass with this, but I am not about to swallow it whole just yet either. If that ruins your day, I'll just have to live with that.

---------------

My reply:

Do you believe he tortured prisoners? Or that his troops have

tortured prisoners before killing them? Is it just rape that you're having a hard time believing? An insane dictator wouldn't even order his men to rape? Men don't rape in a war? There is no rape in a war?

Yes, of course, saying "right" sarcastically means you have "no opinion." Of course it does.

Ruin my day? My, what an opinion you have of yourself.

--------------

Your reply:

Yes, yes, no, no, no, no, yes, yes.

It's a pleasure to meet someone so modest and reasonable as yourself.

--------------

My reply:

Reasonable? I can be. Given a good, well-thought and presented

argument and facts to back it.

Modest? Naw. Hardly ever been accused of. No, give me a second...nope, only been accused of that once and it had nothing to do with my attitude.

If I tracked your answers correctly, you believe rape happens in war just not in this particular instance?

I can come to all kinds of conclusions based on that alone. Perhaps you'll disabuse me of my assumptions and just tell me why you don't think so in this instance?

-------------------

Your reply:

Yawn.

I have no opinion as to what the facts are yet, Ghadaffi is well established to be an idiot, an asshole, etc., however from a legal standpoint it is going to be a tall order to prove what is alleged in the headline. Also it seems questionable to me that hardons and focusing on raping women would improve the military effectiveness of his troops. It's like taking a shit, it decreases your "readiness" when you are raping someone. It sounds like propaganda. Even if it's true, it's propaganda, Ghadaffi's propaganda.

I don't have a problem if they hang his ass with this, but I am not about to swallow it whole just yet either. If that ruins your day, I'll just have to live with that."

--------------

My reply:

Yes. Obviously. No opinion whatsoever.

bemildred
Response to Original message
21. Right.

:sarcasm:

--------------

Your reply:

If that does not make it clear, I doubt that continuing this "discussion" would improve on it. nt

--------

My reply:

When you fall off your high horse, be careful he doesn't kick you in the head.

I've heard it can be quite a painful experience.

------------

Your reply:

If you cannot read and understand what that means, I don't see why there is any hope that

restating it in some other form will do the job.

--------------

My reply:

If you cannot present your argument...why bother posting it.

You've "yawned" posted a "sarcasm" smilie...easier than actually typing something that might explain your viewpoint of not having a sarcastic or tired?/bored? opinion.

Why do you bother? It's a rhetorical question. A rhetorical question is

A rhetorical question is a figure of speech in the form of a question posed for its persuasive effect without the expectation of a reply.


Here is the link: here is the link, you click here for the link to the information

I hope you'll forgive me...that is as s.l.o.w...a.s...I...c.a.n...t.y.p.e.

-------------

Your reply:

I did post my argument, you failed to understand it. nt

-------------

My reply:

You failed to present your argument. n/t

------------

Your reply:

Yawn. nt

------------

My reply:

Additional proof. Nice.

------------

Your reply:

What is the problem? Do you hate critical thinking? nt

---------------

My reply:

Let me know when you show evidence of critical thinking. n/t

---------------

Your reply:

Shall I tweet you? nt

--------------

My reply:

Are you sure you know how?

-------------------

Your reply:

Can you afford to take the chance that I don't? nt

-----------------

My reply:

Are you threatening me? Really? Tweet the whole subthread.

-----------------

[bemildred]

64. Pflugh! Nothing happens. nt

[Cerridwen]

68. Nice try. Glad you finally went public.

[bemildred]

72. This is the Internet? nt

[Cerridwen]

73. I give you the last word.

[bemildred]

74. Well, let's hope it goes better next time then.

:hug:

[Name removed]

103. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[TheWraith]

30. Check your history. Rape has always been a weapon of war use to terrorize an enemy.

If it's made known that any village which resists will be targeted for mass rape, that's a strong incentive for people not to resist. Rape has also traditionally been used to humiliate a defeated side, take revenge, or just as an expression of contempt and a means to break the will of the losers. It can also be used as a reward, something to motivate troops to fight harder and win more battles.

[bemildred]

31. I do not doubt that rape has occurred and is occurring now.

Rape is ubiquitous, everywhere and everytime.

[TheWraith]

33. But it's a stretch to believe it was ordered? nt

[bemildred]

34. Yawn.

"I have no opinion as to what the facts are yet, Ghadaffi is well established to be an idiot, an asshole, etc., however from a legal standpoint it is going to be a tall order to prove what is alleged in the headline. Also it seems questionable to me that hardons and focusing on raping women would improve the military effectiveness of his troops. It's like taking a shit, it decreases your "readiness" when you are raping someone. It sounds like propaganda. Even if it's true, it's propaganda, Ghadaffi's propaganda.

I don't have a problem if they hang his ass with this, but I am not about to swallow it whole just yet either. If that ruins your day, I'll just have to live with that."

:hi:

[Marthe48]

101. don't know if this is an appropriate spot

I read that when a male chimp takes over the group, the first thing he does is kill nursing baby chimps and mount all the females. Biologists believe it is a way of insuring success/survival for his genes. I read that years ago, and I wondered then if war rape isn't prehistoric human behavior.

[joshcryer]

38. Why is it so hard to believe that Gaddafi, a known rapist of boys and girls...

...would make such an order or at least be complicit in such an order?

[Cerridwen]

39. Hey, josh. Don't waste any more time with that one.

That person has made up their mind and can not be bothered to think beyond the jerking of their knee.

[joshcryer]

42. Thanks Cerridwen, I think a lot of people are unaware of what Gaddafi's head guard had to say...

...about Gaddafi's sexual exploits (having young boys and girls brought to him to rape; of course for the revolutionary cause and they did so happily and gladly!).

[Cerridwen]

46. Actually, joshcryer, I think a lot of people don't give two shits about

what gaddafi did or has done or does to this day. They are stuck in "western imperialist bad" gaddafi not a "western imperialist good."

They got punked in the first Persian Gulf War of "Shock and Awe" and bought the babies thrown from the incubators and then they bought the shit about "WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION" "MUSHROOM-CLOUD" and now they feel like idiots and can't think beyond that.

See all the buyer's remorse about President Obama and the "OMFG!!!!!111 Weiner DID IT!!!!111" and you'll see some of the same attitudes.

[Turborama]

75. You know the story about the boy who cried wolf?

Well, a real wolf actually did arrive eventually and the sheep were killed because the villagers thought they had become immune to the lies.

[Cerridwen]

76. Precisely. Thank you for that reminder.

Hey, Turborama. I hope all is well with you.

Are we allowed to know each other in these Libyan threads?

:)

So many forgot the, what was it, 200,000+ who were going to be slaughtered by gaddafi's forces when this all began. Now all they can focus on is "we've been lied to before so this must also be a lie" and those "Libyan people must be innocents", or worse.

I'm pro-Peace, but I live in this world. How to harmonize the two?

[bemildred]

43. It's not hard to believe, there is very little I would not believe about Ghaddaffi.

But you could figure that out if you read what I wrote carefully.

[joshcryer]

65. If it was easy to believe would not your responses be exactly the opposite?

[bemildred]

66. No. nt

[joshcryer]

69. Yes, it would necessarily be.

Your feigned "skepticism" and "questions" implies that it is difficult for you to believe it. The ICC's case will be publicly digestable, you can condemn the witnesses if you want, but there are quite a few of them as it is.

[bemildred]

71. Pflugh! Nothing happens. nt

[bemildred]

70. The distinctions among "believable", "plausible", and "true" are important.

And I'm not giving them up.

[joshcryer]

77. So, it's easily believable, is it remotely plausible or very plausible?

It is certainly true that the ICC believes that he has done these things and that indeed the ICC has witnesses to that effect. Is it more likely true that the witnesses are lying or is it more likely true that Gaddafi has done these things?

See, your initial statement does not fit well with "easily believable" at all.

[bemildred]

95. I don't think you care a fig what I think.

You have an axe to grind, and you are going to grind it no matter what I say.

My initial statement was "Right", which expressed skepticism. Apparently you think being skeptical about this sort of story is like un-American or something.

[ronnie624]

104. What you wrote is clear. There is no need to be careful.

Those who are being combative with you, do so because of ideological differences. They want you to get mad along with them, and use this story to rationalize U.S. intervention.

[pelsar]

99. i agree...story doesnt fit

why would young soldiers need viagra anyway?......and it doesnt arouse you..its just keeps it up, something i suspect no young soldier has much of a problem with anyway.....

[harun]

40. Glad I'm not the only one who can spot this BS ten miles away.

[bemildred]

45. It's like drink the KoolAid or you must love Ghaddaffi.

:hi:

[Azathoth]

48. I guess the ICC is now part of the Great Imperialist Conspiracy

:sarcasm:

[Cerridwen]

61. Only until they come out with something against bush.

Then they'll be the know all, omniscient ones.

:sarcasm:

[joshcryer]

67. The ICC is only legitimate when they prosecute westerners.

Since that has not happened yet no one will credit the ICC for the things it has done. Despite that it is doing the best it can and despite that the evidence against Gaddafi is overwhelming.

[Odin2005]

79. Looks like the ICC has gotten thrown under the bus.

Jesus Fucking Christ.

[EFerrari]

86. I know but how many agencies went along with BushCo's WMD bull?

I'm sorry but this just isn't credible. If you're Gaddafi, you don't want to alienate people, you need them.

[Turborama]

89. "If you're Gaddafi, you don't want to alienate people"

:spray:

[EFerrari]

90. Yes, the caricature in the Western media is hilarious, isn't it?

Ha ha ha.

[Turborama]

93. Gaddafi has not needed the "Western media" to characterize him as a psychopath, he's done it himself

Anyone who knows about what he's been up to over the past 4 decades would know that.

[joshcryer]

92. +1

No real response to that one. Gaddafi, winner of hearts and minds, couldn't do this!

[arikara]

81. US intel: No evidence of Viagra as weapon in Libya

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42824884/ns/world_news-mideastn_africa

[Turborama]

83. As most DUers must know, "US intel" has got a lot of things wrong in the past.

That story is from: 4/29/2011 1:52:00 PM ET

That's the April 29.

Today is June 09.

These crimes could have happened since then, or they could have started happening before but the "US intel" didn't have the evidence that the International Criminal Court have now.

ETA

Regardless, rape was used as a weapon of war for thousands of years up until Viagra was invented. Obviously Viagra isn't needed to use rape as a weapon, what it does is it makes rape a more powerful and destructive weapon.

Even if "US intel" got it right in that instance, it doesn't prove that rape wasn't being used as a weapon in Libya up until April 29.

[Nossida]

82. Malarkey

Next we will hear Qaddafi had
babies thrown out of Incubators.

how ridiculous can you get?

[Turborama]

85. You're too late. The incubators thing was, predictably, used in the 1st reply. n/t

[boppers]

88. Buying "containers of sex drugs" cannot make men rape women.

Flaw 1: These men are not (AFAIK) trained to rape, and you can't just turn a man into a rapist on orders.

"He said there were reports of hundreds of women attacked"

Flaw 2: Basic math. A shipping container holds several million doses of a drug. Not hundreds. It was not stated that it was a "shipping" container or any specific size of container (why?), but it doesn't make sense anyways.

Flaw 3: Math, again: Assuming a man with a sexual resting period of 8 hours, and 8 hours of sleep, one man can rape 2 women a day. Assuming there were 300 rapes, (above, hundreds, not specific), and we were talking about more than one day (and this has been on-going since February)...

4 months, 2 rapes a day, 30 days a month, one soldier, 4x2x30x1 = 240 rapes so far. From one soldier.

Let's assume ten rapist soldiers. Across the whole army.

4 months, 2 rapes a day, 30 days a month, ten soldiers, 4x2x30x1 = 2400 rapes so far. Not hundreds, thousands.

Ten men is not an army.

According to:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libyan_Armed_Forces
There were 119,000 active soldiers, and 195,000 reserve. Lets just throw out the reserve to make the math less convoluted.

Lets assume that only ten percent of the men were raping daily (instead of twice a day). That's 11,900 rapes per day. Not "hundreds" since the conflict started.

Lets assume only 1% of the men were rapists. That's 1,190 rapes per day. We're still way above "hundreds" since the conflict started.

How about .1% (one out of a thousand soldiers)? That gets us down to 119 rapes, per day. Which would make sense if the conflict lasted a few days. It's been going on for months.

Once you get down to one out of ten thousand soldiers (.01%), you get to 11 rapes (being nice and rounding down from 11.9 to 11), a day.... 11 per day, times four months, times 30 days a month, equals 1,320 rapes. Still not hundreds.

So, I've worked the math from both directions, but the result is the same... a few hundred rapes isn't part of an institutional system, or if it is, it's a totally broken and ineffective system.

[bemildred]

96. Thanks, and watch out.

I was thinking it might be difficult to prove such claims in court, since it requires proving intent, but you can get savaged for not joining the two minutes of hate.

[Poll_Blind]

98. +1

PB

[harun]

107. They are probably tracking those not joining in the 2 Minutes Hate,

but that is a list I am proud to be on.

The first casualty in any armed conflict is the truth.

[lunatica]

94. During times of extreme turmoil one can't trust that rumors are facts

I'm not saying it isn't true, but I'm also not swallowing it wholesale either. If they were to report that they've talked to Viagra outlets and have found beyond any doubt that extremely large quantities are being bought suddenly from obscure clients then this story would have legs. But since when is the UN or the International Criminal Court free to walk around in Libya today?

[crim son]

105. There is always rape in war

and therefore while we may feel outrage we do little more than that. However, add Viagra into the mix and suddenly Americans are, literally, up in arms. I find this report more than suspicious, I flat out don't believe it but see it as more of the usual propaganda put out there to quiet criticism of American involvement in the Libyan situation.

[laureloak]

106. Why don't we limit the mfg,, distibution and use of these drugs?

[alp227]

108. The Guardian: Libyan diplomat denies Gaddafi is encouraging rape

The embattled regime of Muammar Gaddafi has vehemently denied accusations by a UN panel and western governments that Libyan forces have committed crimes against humanity and war crimes.

Libyan diplomat Mustafa Shaban told the UN human rights council on Thursday that his government that was "the victim of a widespread aggression" and blamed the news media, opposition and foreign mercenaries for human rights violations and even acts of cannibalism.

Shaban's comments came after the chief prosecutor for the court in The Hague said on Wednesday that he was investigating whether Gaddafi provided Viagra to Libyan soldiers to promote rape. Last week a UN panel said its investigators had found evidence that government forces had committed murder, torture and sexual abuses.

The three-member panel of UN investigators also said they found evidence that rebel forces had committed some acts that would constitute war crimes, in a civil war estimated to have killed between 10,000 and 15,000 people.

Full: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jun/09/libya-rape-gaddafi-diplomat-viagra