Secret files: US officials aided Gaddafi

[al bupp]

Source: Aljazeera English

I found what appeared to be the minutes of a meeting between senior Libyan officials – Abubakr Alzleitny and Mohammed Ahmed Ismail – and David Welch, former assistant secretary of state under George W Bush. Welch was the man who brokered the deal to restore diplomatic relations between the US and Libya in 2008.

Welch now works for Bechtel, a multinational American company with billion-dollar construction deals across the Middle East. The documents record that, on August 2, 2011, David Welch met with Gaddafi's officials at the Four Seasons Hotel in Cairo, just a few blocks from the US embassy.

During that meeting Welch advised Gaddafi's team on how to win the propaganda war, suggesting several "confidence-building measures", according to the documents. The documents appear to indicate that an influential US political personality was advising Gaddafi on how to beat the US and NATO.

...

On the floor of the intelligence chief's office lay an envelope addressed to Gaddafi's son Saif Al-Islam. Inside, I found what appears to be a summary of a conversation between US congressman Denis Kucinich, who publicly opposed US policy on Libya, and an intermediary for the Libyan leader's son.

Read more: http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/features/2011/08/2011831151258728747.html

---

It seems to me that this should put something of a damper on the allegations by some that the Libyan revolution is all just a PNAC/neocon conspiracy. If so, it was not a very well coordinated one if multinationals such as Bechtel somehow failed to get the memo.

It should be noted that the report comes complete w/ documentation from the Gaddafi regime's intelligence files in both Arabic and translated into English.

[SpiralHawk]

1. Condi (R) and Quackdaffi (R)

No wonder he had an, um, thing, for Ms. No-One-Could-Have-Imagined Oil Queen (R). She was deff-nut-lee dee-liver-ing bodacious booty* for TeH QuackDaffi (R).

* For those of you with filthy brain-nuggets, I of course mean Pirate Booty stolen by the Republicon FatCat Eeeleete from the honest, tax-paying, flag-saluting, decent, honest, kind, and splendid citizens of These United States. Stop thinking those, um, deviant thots or your will turn into a Republicon.

[watajob]

2. Well,

he's a no good, dirty bastard but he's our no good, dirty bastard. Until he wasn't.

[al bupp]

3. The headline is somewhat misleading

The article decribes recent activities in support of Gaddafi by a former Bush official, as well as by the alleged progressive Democrat from Ohio named Kucinich. I say alleged because I find it hard to understand how a progressive could support a Stalinist dictatorship where free speech and all political associations were outlawed and collective punishment for violation of these laws were practiced.

[Ian David]

5. Maybe Libya was going to legalize pot? n/t

[al bupp]

7. I'm afraid you've lost me w/ this comment, sir

Is it supposed to be a snark against the Obama administration's stance on marajuana legalization? If so, while I think, as I suppose you do, that justice's current stance also flies in the face of progressive principles, I don't think it does so nearly to the degree that a totalitarian state such as Gaddafi's Libya did. What any of this has to do w/ Mr. Kucinich's stance on Libya is beyond me, though.

[boppers]

45. You're wondering how a progressive could support Stalinist policies?

Seriously?

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

[al bupp]

49. Point taken

However, I meant "progressive" in not the sense used by old-line communist parties, which seems downright Orwellian to me, but in the current coinage.

[boppers]

59. Meaning of the current coinage varies.

It leads to lots of confusion.

[JDPriestly]

52. Al Jazeera jumped to false conclusions.

The Atlantic

Update: Rep. Kucinich's office has sent The Atlantic Wire a statement in which the congressman flatly denies Al Jazeera's report, claiming that the document in question is simply a summary of Kucinich's public positions on the Libyan campaign by a Libyan bureaucrat who never consulted with Kucinich himself:

Al Jazeera found a document written by a Libyan bureaucrat to other Libyan bureaucrats. All it proves is that the Libyans were reading the Washington Post, and read there about my efforts to stop the war. I can't help what the Libyans put in their files. My opposition to the war in Libya, even before it formally started, was public and well known. My questions about the legitimacy of the war, who the opposition was, and what NATO was doing, were also well known and consistent with my official duties. Any implication I was doing anything other than trying to bring an end to an unauthorized war is fiction.

The Washington Post article cited in the document reproduced by Al Jazeera references Kucinich's sponsorship of a resolution to end U.S. involvement in Libya but doesn't summarize Kucinich's more detailed questions about the intervention.

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/global/2011/08/report-suggests-kucinich-worked-qaddafi-regime-block-libyan-intervention/41953/

[Ikonoklast]

4. Dennis Kucinich was doing some back-door diplomatic dealing with Saif Al-Islam, Qaddafi's son.

He was running his own little deal trying to support his political stance on Libya with the Qaddafi regime, it would seem.

http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/features/2011/08/2011831151258728747.html

It appears Welch was not the only prominent American giving help to Gaddafi as NATO and the rebel army were locked in battle with his regime.

On the floor of the intelligence chief's office lay an envelope addressed to Gaddafi's son Saif Al-Islam. Inside, I found what appears to be a summary of a conversation between US congressman Denis Kucinich, who publicly opposed US policy on Libya, and an intermediary for the Libyan leader's son.

It details a request by the congressman for information he needed to lobby US lawmakers to suspend their support for the Libyan National Transitional Council (NTC) and to put an end to NATO airstrikes.

According to the document, Kucinich wanted evidence of corruption within the NTC and, like Welch, any possible links within rebel ranks to al-Qaeda.

[Muskypundit]

6. Oooo....

I just read that article and if thats not damning to Kucinich... then you haven't read the article.

[No Elephants]

12. I read it. You're kidding, right?

[JDPriestly]

54. Better read Kucinich's response

The Atlantic

Update: Rep. Kucinich's office has sent The Atlantic Wire a statement in which the congressman flatly denies Al Jazeera's report, claiming that the document in question is simply a summary of Kucinich's public positions on the Libyan campaign by a Libyan bureaucrat who never consulted with Kucinich himself:

Al Jazeera found a document written by a Libyan bureaucrat to other Libyan bureaucrats. All it proves is that the Libyans were reading the Washington Post, and read there about my efforts to stop the war. I can't help what the Libyans put in their files. My opposition to the war in Libya, even before it formally started, was public and well known. My questions about the legitimacy of the war, who the opposition was, and what NATO was doing, were also well known and consistent with my official duties. Any implication I was doing anything other than trying to bring an end to an unauthorized war is fiction.

The Washington Post article cited in the document reproduced by Al Jazeera references Kucinich's sponsorship of a resolution to end U.S. involvement in Libya but doesn't summarize Kucinich's more detailed questions about the intervention.

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/global/2011/08/report-suggests-kucinich-worked-qaddafi-regime-block-libyan-intervention/41953/

[JDPriestly]

8. The source claims to have found this in an office in Libya

-- notes of a conversation alleged to have involved Kucinich.

First of all, this is hearsay, and second, the source if unreliable.

And, even if the document reflects an actual conversation frankly, I think it is perfectly reasonable for Kucinich to ask for more information about the rebels.

We are over there supporting rebels, and we really don't know who they are. Some of them seem quite trustworthy -- but are those who are trustworthy really in charge?

The Obama administration is taking a big chance if it has committed our air power without first having the answers to these questions.

You have to weigh pros and cons on this. Making an emotionally charged, rash decision to support one side or another without having these facts is a huge mistake.

Ghaddafi is horrible, but what will follow?

We do not seem to know.

We seem to be working on the "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" theory. Nothing could be further from the truth in third world countries.

[pinboy3niner]

9. The 'We don't know these guys' notion is pretty outdated

The U.S. put a team on the ground in Benghazi months ago to vet the NTC. The team, which also traveled to other cities, had grown to 9, and probably is even larger now. It was their investigations which cleared the NTC for U.S. recognition.

[No Elephants]

13. What does that have to do with Kucinich allegedly gathering information, though?

[joshcryer]

27. Kucinich help outlin what kind of information they needed, starting from the preconcieved notions...

...necessary to sue. That is, that the rebels were bad news. Period. There was no full truth commission. Kucinich never sent a truth commission to talk to the rebels.

[No Elephants]

35. Huh? Where did I say anything about a truth commission?

[joshcryer]

37. I assumed that's what you meant by "gathering information."

So if you don't care if the information is true or not that's fine, I guess. I personally gather information from all sides as to glean the truth.

[Name removed]

39. Deleted message

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

[joshcryer]

47. Please drop the pedantry. You could replace "truth commission" with "truth seeking mission"...

...or whatever other framing you're looking for. The basic point is that Kucinich did not give a shit about the truth, he merely wanted ammo against the rebels and anything they could use to further the "anti-UN agenda" truth be damned.

Fact is most of the questions are certainly questions you'd expect Kucinich to ask, but some of them are far more egregious, particularly as it plays into the PR war.

edit: or "fact finding" as you say http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4980410&mesg_id=4980983">here.

One side never has the facts, it takes a view of several sides to get the actual facts.

[JDPriestly]

55. Here is the true story.

The Atlantic

Update: Rep. Kucinich's office has sent The Atlantic Wire a statement in which the congressman flatly denies Al Jazeera's report, claiming that the document in question is simply a summary of Kucinich's public positions on the Libyan campaign by a Libyan bureaucrat who never consulted with Kucinich himself:

Al Jazeera found a document written by a Libyan bureaucrat to other Libyan bureaucrats. All it proves is that the Libyans were reading the Washington Post, and read there about my efforts to stop the war. I can't help what the Libyans put in their files. My opposition to the war in Libya, even before it formally started, was public and well known. My questions about the legitimacy of the war, who the opposition was, and what NATO was doing, were also well known and consistent with my official duties. Any implication I was doing anything other than trying to bring an end to an unauthorized war is fiction.

The Washington Post article cited in the document reproduced by Al Jazeera references Kucinich's sponsorship of a resolution to end U.S. involvement in Libya but doesn't summarize Kucinich's more detailed questions about the intervention.

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/global/2011/08/report-suggests-kucinich-worked-qaddafi-regime-block-libyan-intervention/41953/

[Ikonoklast]

10. So, out of nowhere, Col Qaddafi's son makes stuff up about a congressman from Ohio.

So the rebels can find it at a later date.


Or the rebels did it themselves, because Dennis pissed them off.

Really.

Occam's Razor comes to mind.

[JDPriestly]

41. Either explanation is possible.

It is also possible that any discussion that took place between Kucinich and someone other than Ghaddafi's son.

It is also possible that the notes are preparation for a hoped-for discussion. The whole thing is unclear.

[karynnj]

16. Those questions were asked by the administration and by the SFRC

- the administartion and the SFRC even hosted some rebels in DC.

The question is what Kucinich did in Libya - if he tried to negotiate it is not ok.

[al bupp]

17. Yes, but I would bet they did not pose them to a regime notorious for it boundless mendacity

Did Kucinich really think he was going to get a straight answer from Gaddafi or his apparatchiks? If he did, then I'd say that puts his judgment in some serious doubt.

[No Elephants]

21. Nothing says that he was relying solely on their answers for 100% of his information.

Or that he was going to take their answers at face value.

P.S. the U.S. does a lot worse than submit a list of questions to regimes of boundless mendacity. We've always loved us some dictators, especially in the Middle East, because they keep their countries so "stable."

[al bupp]

29. Nothing says he was relying on anything else either

If he sent simular letters to the NTC in Benghazi, then let's see those. Somehow I dout there were any because he was clearly looking for "evidence" to support for his pre-conceived ideological position on the matter.

I also might point out that when a Democratic president attempts to change the detestable US record of support for dictators, especially one that cannot be said to have been in the interests of any kind of stability, then well it's all abut the oil.

[No Elephants]

34. How would this story possibly tell you what Kucinich intended to do with the answers he got, if any?

There is an investigative process. There is no reason to assume that someone whose job includes investigating will not follow it. And with absolutely no evidence, there is no reason for you to condemn Kucinich for simply asking a Libyan bureaucrat questions--if that is even true. After all, according to you, anyone who would even ask the person questions has poor judgement.

"If he sent simular letters to the NTC in Benghazi, then let's see those."

Who said he sent letters to the Ntc? Are they in the OP article? If not, how do you suggest I provide them? And, by the way, how did it become my responsiblity to produce them?


"Somehow I dout there were any because he was clearly looking for "evidence" to support for his pre-conceived ideological position on the matter."


As I've posted before, He was against the war. That is no secret. The US already wanted the war. That was no secret. He had no need to come up with reasons to support our involvement.

And his questions were directed to the enemies of the rebels. You are surprised that he did not ask Gaddafi's son for a list of the good deeds of the rebels, or reasons why their attacks on Gaddafi and his family and regime were unjustified?

Can we please be reasonable?

"I also might point out that when a Democratic president attempts to change the detestable US record of support for dictators, especially one that cannot be said to have been in the interests of any kind of stability, then well it's all abut the oil."

Are you directing that at me? Have you seen me post that? But, yes, I have seen posts to that effect, regarding as to Democratic Presidents, Republican Presidents and foreign heads of state.

I've also seen about an equal number of posts taking a different position. If you only see one kind of post and only about Obama, I submit your perception needs work.

[al bupp]

56. No, I did not mean to suggest that you ought provide anything, sir

Rather, I meant that Kucinich would do well to show that he made an attempt to solicit a range of opinions from more than just the Gaddafi regime, whose answers would seem to have been a forgone conclusion.

I disagree w/ you about the US stance regarding the war, which I think, on the whole the Obama administration would have been happy to avoid altogether, as it offered little prospect for wide-spread support among a population preoccupied w/ economic concerns who largely don't care about events in the middle east. Taking the risk to get involved, despite the apparent success of the strategy employed, has not proven to have helped Obama in the polls.

Sure Kucinich was against our involvement in Libya. I think for him it was mostly a knee-jerk reaction shared by many here. I do not fault him for that particularly. Given recent history in Iraq, am even sympathetic to it. However, in this case, I think it fails to note the distinct differences in circumstances present in Libya, the most important of which is that this revolution is clearly home-grown.

The comment about the principal critique of US involvement boiling down to a cynical sentiment about oil was not directed at you personally, though I can understand why you might have thought so. No, I cannot recall you ever posting such a sentiment, and it was unfair to tar you wish that brush, my apologies, sir.

I suppose that my intention was to point out that it seems hypocritical to say on the one hand that the US has over the years supported a lot of nefarious regimes (yes, under both Republican and Democratic administrations), and then dismissing it in a instance where (finally) that's not the case.

[karynnj]

62. I would hope that no diplomat would take any comment at face value without comparing it

to actions taken. That said, there are many examples where Senators spoke to outlaw countries. In 2005, Kerry and Dodd, two very senior members of the SFRC, spoke to the leader of Syria. The rw press went ballistic over their and Pelosi's visit, but the Senators actually had questions from Condi Rice that they asked.

In a visit I had problems with, DeMint had a visit with those involved in the Honduras coup at a point where the President was calling it a coup - and he strongly backed them when it was counter to the administration's position - but in line with what we did for decades.

[karynnj]

63. I was responding to someone trying to justify DK saying the questions

were not asked. The SFRC spoke to administration people who had met some of the leaders - and a few members of the SFRC had personally met with the rebel leaders as well. (In addition, the SFRC hosted the Libyan ambassador to the US who joined the rebels.) In addition, they heard from scholars on the region, who were not in the administration.

To your point, no they did not ask Gaddafi his opinion - his being on record calling them "rats" suggests that he would not give a fair description of them.

[No Elephants]

20. No evidence of negotiation in the article, just a list of questions. Fact finding.

[karynnj]

61. I was abso;utely NOT implying there was - and was saying that fact finding

is, not just ok, but is part of his responsibility - I think he is on the House FR committee. I would hope that he also listened to whatever independent experts there were in the region - including our current and past diplomatic staff in Libya, who would have known at least some of the rebel leaders. What Kucinich did seems less than what DeMint did - without consequences - in Honduras, where he not only met the coupsters, but spoke of the support they had in Congress.

I do think the former Bush employee stepped over the line as it seems that he was actively advising Gaddafi against the government's position. Whether it was technically against the law, I have no idea.

[No Elephants]

11. "Dennis Kucinich issued a statement to the Atlantic Wire stating:

"Al Jazeera found a document written by a Libyan bureaucrat to other Libyan bureaucrats. All it proves is that the Libyans were reading the Washington Post... I can't help what the Libyans put in their files... Any implication I was doing anything other than trying to bring an end to an unauthorised war is fiction."

Too bad they did not provide the full statement.

Assume the document reflects an actual conversation. What "Little deal" are you talking about? What did Kucinich give the Gaddafys?

Kucinich was against the war. That was never a secret. If the story is true, he was trying to get information to support his position that the war should end--or should never have started.

What on earth is so unusual about a member of Congress having a position and gathering information to support it?

[al bupp]

18. Nothing's unusual about gathering information, per se

I think what might raise some eyebrows would be that he's gathering "information" from regime that never met a lie too that was big. What kind of answers did he think he was going to get from Gaddafi, who'd already asserted that the revolution was primarily composed of drug-addled al-Qaeda operatives who'd been whipped into a frenzy w/ spiked Nescafe?

[No Elephants]

22. See Reply 21. BTW, if you were trying to investigate Libyan rebels, you would NOT ask

the Libyan government any questions? Sorry, but that's just silly.

That would be like my not asking J. Edgar Hoover about people he may have had under surveillance. I would not have trusted him as far as I could throw him, but I sure would have asked him to see what he would say.

When you investigate, you ask as many people as might know and then you try to check answers, assess credibility, etc. and you try, via a process, to distill to a core of info that you feel is relatively reliable.

And, please remind me: whose word do we have that Kucinich even asked those questions? An official of the Libyan government, right?

You're taking his word as gospel to accuse Kucinich of who know what, though, while criticizing Kucinich for even asking that same person some questions. Odd, what?

[Ikonoklast]

19. You would then have no problem with a Republican running his own diplomatic mission

being in contact with high-ranking members of a foreign government, and in the process possibly undercutting the State Department and the stated foreign policy of the Government of The United States then, no complaints.

If it was Jim DeMint doing this instead of St. Dennis, you'd be calling for his head as a traitor.

[No Elephants]

23. Spare me the mickey mouse posting games. And don't presume to tell me what I would do in

some hypothetical situation that has nothing to do with the facts in the Al Jazeera article. Especially when you are fabricating from whole cloth the notion that my views of something depend upon whether a Republican or a Democrat is doing it.

Fact: The OP article displays a list of questions a Libyan official alleges Kucinich asked about the rebels.

Fact finding is part of Congress's duties. Representatives and Senators seeks out facts in the ordinary course of performing their duties.

What on earth does a list of questions have to do with anyone, Republican or Democrat, conducting a a diplomatic mission?

[joshcryer]

25. No need to presume, your record is clear...

...at least http://upload.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4971793&mesg_id=4972969">to me.

:rofl:

[No Elephants]

28. Your reading comprehension issue, not my double standard.

I';m posting on this thread about Kucinich asking questions.

The headline of the thread you link to is:


"Leaked Cable: McCain Promised Qaddafi To Help Secure Military Equipment From U.S."

A little different from asking questions.

[joshcryer]

33. Not really. Both McCain and Kucinich were helping the regime.

McCain went to Gaddafi and informed him of the ways that he could get his way, likewise Kucinich and Welch informed the regime what they wanted as far as evidence is concerned.

[Ikonoklast]

32. Fact: You completely ignored what I said.

Mickey Mouse, indeed.

So you have no problem with DeMint dealing with foreign dictators in order to score political points, a la The Kucinich.

Nice to know.

[No Elephants]

36. Not fact, but bs. Again, spare me the mickey mouse posting games.

Don't presume to tell me what I would and would not have a problem with, especially when you are making up a situation that has nothing to do with this one. I said that before, so I did address what you said. The fact that you did not recognize that as addressing what your post said is your problem.

If you want to know what I think ask me.

Second, Kucinich ALLEGEDLY gave a list of questions, or asked a group of questions, of a Libyan bureaucrat. That is ALL the OP story tells us. Kucinich tells us his only motive was to stop the war, his desire to do that being no secret to anyone here.

You keep trying to make it sound as a lot more than that, ascribing motives and characterizations that are simply not supported.

Would I have a problem with any member of Congress passing a list of questions like Kucinich asked to a bureaucrat? No. Do you think I should and, if so, why?

Or do you think Congress should just go about declaring war and spending our money without asking any questions of anyone but the WH?

[JDPriestly]

43. Here is where the idea of a lawsuit by Kucinich (and others)

came:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/2chambers/post/kucinich-other-house-members-file-lawsuit-against-obama-on-libya-military-mission/2011/06/15/AGrzd6VH_blog.html

Rep. Kucinich's office has sent The Atlantic Wire a statement in which the congressman flatly denies Al Jazeera's report, claiming that the document in question is simply a summary of Kucinich's public positions on the Libyan campaign by a Libyan bureaucrat who never consulted with Kucinich himself:

Al Jazeera found a document written by a Libyan bureaucrat to other Libyan bureaucrats. All it proves is that the Libyans were reading the Washington Post, and read there about my efforts to stop the war. I can't help what the Libyans put in their files. My opposition to the war in Libya, even before it formally started, was public and well known. My questions about the legitimacy of the war, who the opposition was, and what NATO was doing, were also well known and consistent with my official duties. Any implication I was doing anything other than trying to bring an end to an unauthorized war is fiction.

The Washington Post article cited in the document reproduced by Al Jazeera references Kucinich's sponsorship of a resolution to end U.S. involvement in Libya but doesn't summarize Kucinich's more detailed questions about the intervention.

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/global/2011/08/report-suggests-kucinich-worked-qaddafi-regime-block-libyan-intervention/41953/

[joshcryer]

26. Al Jazeera uncovered that Welch and Kucinich laid out the kind of propaganda evidence...

...that would be necessary to sue. The bureaucrat's document is clearly motivated by their "truth mission." 90% of those talking points in that article have been directly reflected here on these forums and elsewhere, and it is goddamn appalling.

[No Elephants]

30. Please don't change the subject you brought up just yet, Josh. First, tell me how Kucinich asking

a bureaucrat 10 to 20 questions (IF he did that) is like McCain and Graham promising to give Gaddify military aid, to the extent that you ROFL over my alleged double standard.

While you're at it, tell me why you suddenly have a problem with a Democrat defending a Democrat.

[joshcryer]

31. "He is going to fight for us but he has asked us for evidence."

Find me one instance where he contacted the fucking opposition. He didn't.

I go to someone I want to "gather information from."

I don't go to them and say "I need information that only improves you in my light, I want information pro and con about your situation. Are you willing, for instance, to stand down and completely retire? Are you willing, for instance, to allow open protest in any city that wants it?"

Instead the impression the bureaucrat got was that he was fighting for them.

[Name removed]

38. Deleted message

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

[joshcryer]

46. I did in fact respond to those posts, it's not my fault you're so easily dismissive.

[JDPriestly]

42. Kucinich seems to suggest that the Libyans got the questions

from an article in the Washington Post.

All it proves is that the Libyans were reading the Washington Post... I can't help what the Libyans put in their files...

The notes just don't explain fully what they are.

They may concern a discussion about Kucinich, not a discussion with Kucinich. It's possible that it is a discussion with Kucinich, but this article is very unclear. And Al Jazeerah and RT are to be taken with as much of a grain of salt as is the American media. There is a lot of nonsense spewed on all sides.

This may cast a bad light on Kucinich, but it may not.

[joshcryer]

48. It won't. Kucinich is immune from criticism, as this thread shows.

It just becomes a pissing match of insults. Far be it for Kucinich to ask for "Any evidence of Civilian deaths by NATO." Fully believable.

[JDPriestly]

50. This might interest you.

Update: Rep. Kucinich's office has sent The Atlantic Wire a statement in which the congressman flatly denies Al Jazeera's report, claiming that the document in question is simply a summary of Kucinich's public positions on the Libyan campaign by a Libyan bureaucrat who never consulted with Kucinich himself:

Al Jazeera found a document written by a Libyan bureaucrat to other Libyan bureaucrats. All it proves is that the Libyans were reading the Washington Post, and read there about my efforts to stop the war. I can't help what the Libyans put in their files. My opposition to the war in Libya, even before it formally started, was public and well known. My questions about the legitimacy of the war, who the opposition was, and what NATO was doing, were also well known and consistent with my official duties. Any implication I was doing anything other than trying to bring an end to an unauthorized war is fiction.

The Washington Post article cited in the document reproduced by Al Jazeera references Kucinich's sponsorship of a resolution to end U.S. involvement in Libya but doesn't summarize Kucinich's more detailed questions about the intervention.

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/global/2011/08/report-suggests-kucinich-worked-qaddafi-regime-block-libyan-intervention/41953/

There really is no evidence that Kucinich presented his questions directly to anyone in the then Libyan government. The Ghaddafis were grasping at straws, just hoping beyond hope. There is nothing to the Al Jazeera article other than the finding of some notes prepared by someone who does not clearly state what the notes are based on.

[MilesColtrane]

40. I'm sure Gaddafi was happy to have someone in the U.S. government...

willing to push to end U.S. and NATO involvement.

What do they call someone with good intentions being manipulated into aiding a despot...a "useful idiot"?

[JDPriestly]

53. No. He wasn't.

The Atlantic

Update: Rep. Kucinich's office has sent The Atlantic Wire a statement in which the congressman flatly denies Al Jazeera's report, claiming that the document in question is simply a summary of Kucinich's public positions on the Libyan campaign by a Libyan bureaucrat who never consulted with Kucinich himself:

Al Jazeera found a document written by a Libyan bureaucrat to other Libyan bureaucrats. All it proves is that the Libyans were reading the Washington Post, and read there about my efforts to stop the war. I can't help what the Libyans put in their files. My opposition to the war in Libya, even before it formally started, was public and well known. My questions about the legitimacy of the war, who the opposition was, and what NATO was doing, were also well known and consistent with my official duties. Any implication I was doing anything other than trying to bring an end to an unauthorized war is fiction.

The Washington Post article cited in the document reproduced by Al Jazeera references Kucinich's sponsorship of a resolution to end U.S. involvement in Libya but doesn't summarize Kucinich's more detailed questions about the intervention.

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/global/2011/08/report-suggests-kucinich-worked-qaddafi-regime-block-libyan-intervention/41953/

[LetTimmySmoke]

14. The real reason for the GOP opposition to the Lybia campaign is becoming clearer.

[No Elephants]

15. OMG, I hope we don't find out Dennis also speaks on the floor of the House from time to time.

That would be just too unusual for a Congressional Representative, and therefore ooooo, sinister and incriminating.

Good lord.

[joshcryer]

24. This is goddamn apalling. Every Gaddafi talking point comes from this report.

This is beyond the pale. It is vile, despicable, just, I have no words that I can utter without getting my post deleted. It is the worst of the worst.

[JDPriestly]

51. The report is not based on any discussion by Kucinich with anyone in Libya.

The Atlantic

Update: Rep. Kucinich's office has sent The Atlantic Wire a statement in which the congressman flatly denies Al Jazeera's report, claiming that the document in question is simply a summary of Kucinich's public positions on the Libyan campaign by a Libyan bureaucrat who never consulted with Kucinich himself:

Al Jazeera found a document written by a Libyan bureaucrat to other Libyan bureaucrats. All it proves is that the Libyans were reading the Washington Post, and read there about my efforts to stop the war. I can't help what the Libyans put in their files. My opposition to the war in Libya, even before it formally started, was public and well known. My questions about the legitimacy of the war, who the opposition was, and what NATO was doing, were also well known and consistent with my official duties. Any implication I was doing anything other than trying to bring an end to an unauthorized war is fiction.

The Washington Post article cited in the document reproduced by Al Jazeera references Kucinich's sponsorship of a resolution to end U.S. involvement in Libya but doesn't summarize Kucinich's more detailed questions about the intervention.

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/global/2011/08/report-suggests-kucinich-worked-qaddafi-regime-block-libyan-intervention/41953/

[Judi Lynn]

44. Senior Bush diplomat 'advised Gaddafi regime to the end'

Senior Bush diplomat 'advised Gaddafi regime to the end'
An American businessman, who served as a senior US diplomat under George W. Bush, advised the Gaddafi regime as it struggled to cling to power in Libya, it has been claimed.
By Jon Swaine, New York
12:17AM BST 01 Sep 2011

Documents reportedly found in the ransacked headquarters of Libya's intelligence service indicate that assistance was given by David Welch, Mr Bush's assistant secretary of state for near eastern affairs from 2005 to 2008.

They also suggest Dennis Kucinich, a Left-wing US congressman, asked the Gaddafis for evidence of corruption among rebel leaders that he could use to lobby for an end to US involvement in the conflict.

Mr Welch, 57, a former ambassador to Egypt, brokered the restoration of diplomatic relations between the US and Libya in 2008. One paper said to have been discovered yesterday by a reporter for Al Jazeera purports to be a minute of a meeting between Mr Welch and two Libyan officials, Abubakr Alzleitny and Mohammed Ahmed Ismail, at the Four Seasons hotel in Cairo on August 2.

Mr Welch, now a senior executive at Bechtel, an American firm with construction contracts in Libya, reportedly advised them on "confidence building measures" to improve the regime's public standing.

More:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/8733942/Senior-Bush-diplomat-advised-Gaddafi-regime-to-the-end.html

[al bupp]

57. Thanks for posting this addendum, ma'am

I think it's actually the more interesting of the Aljazeera revelations, as it shows that at least one large multinational w/ numerous US government contracts had an interest in seeing Gaddafi stay in power.

[tabatha]

58. From the article, some points that seem to have been missed:

- appears to be a summary of a conversation between US congressman Denis Kucinich

- It details a request by the congressman for information he needed to lobby US lawmakers to suspend their support for the Libyan National Transitional Council (NTC) and to put an end to NATO airstrikes.

- According to the document, Kucinich wanted evidence of corruption within the NTC and, like Welch, any possible links within rebel ranks to al-Qaeda.

- The document also lists specific information needed to defend Saif Al-Islam, who is currently on the International Criminal Court's most-wanted list.

The last point is not something that would be gleaned from any newspaper - it had to have resulted from a conversation with Kucinich.

And for Kucinich to consider how to defend someone whose crimes were so bad that there was enough to cause an arrest warrant from the ICC, is beyond the pale. That, to me, is the most shameful of all, and it is not discussed at all above. In fact all of the quotes seem to deliberately ignore that fact.

As far as trying to get evidence of corruption within the NTC by one of the most corrupt governments on earth, is just astounding. I cannot believe that any democrat would do something like that.

And of course, Kucinich would like to deny everything. Imagine, associating with such a brutal family.

By the way, there is a petition to remove Kucinich from office here:
http://www.change.org/petitions/united-states-house-of-representatives-we-demand-an-immediate-dismissal-of-dennis-kucinich

[Turborama]

60. Those details are also covered in the AJE video

At the top of the article in the OP: http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/features/2011/08/2011831151258728747.html

YouTube version: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_bgscOtHDrI

And posted in the videos forum: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x613515

:hi: