BLOODY RACISM is the hallmark of new Libya as their forces relentlessly obliterate all opposition

[Distant Observer]

While the west celebrates the liberation of Libya, in much of the non-white world what is seen is the Western powers engaged in the relentless obliteration of a Pan-African authoritarian regime to replace it with an Anti-African hodge-podge of idealists, opportunists and jihadists who seem determined to wipe-out all people opposed to their revolution, especially if they are black.

While CNN only shows the waving of the old monarchist flag on the new shiny gut turrets of the joyous and victorious rebels, in other parts of the world they hear the reports of racist killings and torture, of mass graves with the bodies of Gaddafi supporters, and rebel banners saluting: "THE BRIGADE FOR PURGING SLAVES, BLACK SKIN".

NATO's Libya revolution is now disgraced by the stain of bloody racism.

----

http://allafrica.com/stories/201109080620.html

The Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has called on the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights to ask Libya to stop the killing of Nigerians and other black Africans in that country.

In a request for provisional measures dated September 7, 2011 and signed by solicitor to SERAP, Mr Femi Falana, the organisation noted that there had been cases of discrimination and racial killings carried out by agents of Libya's National Transitional Council (NTC).


http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/206506/20110831/libya-revolt-rebels-black-african-migrants-racism-murder-gadhafi.htm

The ongoing revolution and chaos in Libya has many facets, some in contradiction to others. One of the most prominent characteristics of these six months of brutal fighting and civil war have been the innocents caught in the middle -- namely, the hundreds of thousands of migrant workers from black (sub-Saharan) Africa who have not only had their lives disrupted (permanently, in some cases), but who have also been subject to the most visceral forms of racism.

Despite Moammar Gadhafi’s long financial support for Black African nations (and his impossible dream of achieving a “United States of Africa” that would include Libya), anti-black racism is deeply entrenched in many Arab societies, including Libya.


http://www.jamaicaobserver.com/columns/Racist-killings-in-Libya-s--regime-change--and-Caricom-s-mixed-signals_9598670

WHILE the warplanes of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) continue to facilitate the anti-Moammar Gadhafi rebel forces to take full control of Libya, there are increasing reports of racist killings and torture against black Africans accused of being mercenaries of the deposed Libyan president.

The atrocities had become widespread enough by early last week for the African Union (AU) to officially refuse to recognise the NATO-backed National Transitional Council (NTC), currently in the process of transforming itself into the "new government" of Libya, functioning from the capital, Tripoli.

Read more: http://www.jamaicaobserver.com/columns/Racist-killings-in-Libya-s--regime-change--and-Caricom-s-mixed-signals_9598670#ixzz1YAGUyLit


http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/aug/30/libya-spectacular-revolution-disgraced-racism

"This is a bad time to be a black man in Libya," reported Alex Thomson on Channel 4 News on Sunday. Elsewhere, Kim Sengupta reported for the Independent on the 30 bodies lying decomposing in Tripoli. The majority of them, allegedly mercenaries for Muammar Gaddafi, were black. They had been killed at a makeshift hospital, some on stretchers, some in an ambulance. "Libyan people don't like people with dark skins," a militiaman explained in reference to the arrests of black men.

The basis of this is rumours, disseminated early in the rebellion, of African mercenaries being unleashed on the opposition. Amnesty International's Donatella Rivera was among researchers who examined this allegation and found no evidence for it. Peter Bouckaert of Human Rights Watch similarly had not "identified one mercenary" among the scores of men being arrested and falsely labelled by journalists as such.

Lurking behind this is racism. Libya is an African nation – however, the term "Africans" is used in Libya to reference the country's black minority. The Amnesty International researcher Diana Eltahawy says that the rebels taking control of Libya have tapped into "existing xenophobia". The New York Times refers to "racist overtones", but sometimes the racism is explicit. A rebel slogan painted in Misrata during the fighting salutes "the brigade for purging slaves, black skin". A consequence of this racism has been mass arrests of black men, and gruesome killings – just some of the various atrocities that human rights organisations blame rebels for. The racialisation of this conflict does not end with hatred of "Africans". Graffiti by rebels frequently depicted Gaddafi as a demonic Jew.

[Cali_Democrat]

1. The NATO-backed rebels are essentially committing genocide against blacks in Libya

Not that NATO needed any more shame, but there it is. NATO is essentially backing ethnic cleansing. Of course Libya has loads of oil under its soil, so there's that.

[sabrina 1]

2. A spokesperson in Britain for NATO was asked about it yesterday

'have you just replaced one brutal regime with another'? He was very calm about it and said something like 'I don't think so, we are hoping that things will improve' or words to that effect.

What was remarkable was that he admitted that they conducted a 'regime change' which was a violation of the UN Resolution. But then, who's going to stop them? They are Rulers of the World.

Not to mention that NATO has no business in Africa unless one of their member states was attacked, which did not happen.

So, another Imperial War in one of the SEVEN countries on the PNAC list. No wonder they were so happy about it.

It is shameful what is happening to Black Africans there, but the supporters just brush it aside.

[PurityOfEssence]

49. Very true: NATO can only act if one of its members is attacked

The various nations may do as they please in accord with their internal laws when the UN calls up the troops, but NATO itself has specifically no jurisdiction here according to its own rules.

This whole thing is truly filthy.

[kelly1mm]

3. Lalalalalalalalalalalala can't hear you lalalalalalalalalalalalala. nt

[sabrina 1]

4. And if anyone doubts who's going to be in charge in Libya, there is this:

A familiar face emerges to lead Libya's new army



Gen. Khalifa Hifter, the newly named leader of the Libyan army, met with former army officers in Zawiyah. | David Enders/MCT

Who is he and who 'named him'?

But leading the discussion wasn't the man most Western news reporters have focused on in recent weeks, Hakim Belhaj, the leader of rebel forces in Tripoli and a former member of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, who was imprisoned by Gadhafi after the CIA captured him in Southeast Asia in 2004.

Instead, the man who spoke to the eager former officers was Gen. Khalifa Hifter, who defected from Gadhafi's army in 1987 and moved to the United States, where he lived in the Washington suburbs for decades before returning to Libya earlier this year.

.....

There has been widespread speculation that Hifter, who spent his exile in Fairfax, Va., had worked with the CIA. He did not deny having had contact with the U.S. intelligence agency but said he had never worked for it

.

So, since this General has now taken over and relegated the leader of the rebels, the one who was tortured in Libya, to only Tripoli, it's clear that the rebels will have little say in what happens to their country.

Sharif said Belhaj's position had been confirmed on Tuesday during a meeting with Mustafa Abdul-Jalil, the chairman of the rebel National Transitional Council and the country's de facto head of state.

But Hifter said his appointment supersedes Belhaj's position.

"Now we will rebuild the army," Hifter said. "We are responsible for the entire country. Belhaj is in charge of the revolutionaries in Tripoli."

He speaks with authority! But from whom does he get it? He has not lived in Libya for decades. But Belhaj has just been told where to go and who is in charge. I hope Belhaj is not sent to one of our other dungeons in Uzbekistan where we are currently supporting yet another Brutal Dictator.

He could easily be called a 'terrorist' again, if he steps out of line.

[chill_wind]

74. Excellent points, Sabrina. n/t

[Zax2me]

5. Too much wild celebration going on. even here.

Fucking OOPS.
K&R

[Distant Observer]

9. What distrubs is the wild shooting-up of each city they seek to "liberate" from the mad clutches

of the former dictator.

In the history of Libya there has probably never been so much destruction.

[sad sally]

32. According to some, this destruction is good. How can that make any sense?

from this link http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/8716240/Libya-live.html?du

comes this:

The full scale of the rebuilding challenge facing the Libyan people is vast and diverse. At least 30,000 people have been killed and 50,000 injured since the fighting began. The dead must be mourned without lasting sectarianism, the injured have to be healed and the rebel fighters, many of them under 25, have to put down their guns, still their blood and return to their former lives as students, shopkeepers or businessmen.

Easier said then done...

[in_cog_ni_to]

6. The rebels liberated Libya! It's what the people wanted! It's all good.

:sarcasm:

Never mind no one knew who the hell the rebels were when they decided to back them. I guess they're finding that out now...after the fact? *sigh*

Now what are they going to do?

[white_wolf]

7. So who else isn't surprised by this? Did we really expect any less from NATO?

Imperialist nations never do anything for the good of the countries they claim to be liberating, there is always a profit motive. Lenin wrote a great essay on this, if anyone wants to read more about it.

[Boojatta]

10. Did Lenin write an essay on transfer of power under communism from one leader to the next?

[white_wolf]

16. Lenin wrote a lot. For his views on government. I suggest the April Thesis.

For his thoughts on the man who would succeed him in leading the USSR, well I'll just quote that:

Comrade Stalin, having become Secretary-General, has unlimited authority concentrated in his hands, and I am not sure whether he will always be capable of using that authority with sufficient caution. Comrade Trotsky, on the other hand, as his struggle against the C.C. on the question of the People's Commissariat of Communications has already proved, is distinguished not only by outstanding ability. He is personally perhaps the most capable man in the present C.C., but he has displayed excessive self-assurance and shown excessive preoccupation with the purely administrative side of the work.

As to his thoughts on Imperialism, here is a small sample:

If it were necessary to give the briefest possible definition of imperialism we should have to say that imperialism is the monopoly stage of capitalism. Such a definition would include what is most important, for, on the one hand, finance capital is the bank capital of a few very big monopolist banks, merged with the capital of the monopolist associations of industrialists; and, on the other hand, the division of the world is the transition from a colonial policy which has extended without hindrance to territories unseized by any capitalist power, to a colonial policy of monopolist possession of the territory of the world, which has been completely divided up.

But very brief definitions, although convenient, for they sum up the main points, are nevertheless inadequate, since we have to deduce from them some especially important features of the phenomenon that has to be defined. And so, without forgetting the conditional and relative value of all definitions in general, which can never embrace all the concatenations of a phenomenon in its full development, we must give a definition of imperialism that will include the following five of its basic features:

(1) the concentration of production and capital has developed to such a high stage that it has created monopolies which play a decisive role in economic life; (2) the merging of bank capital with industrial capital, and the creation, on the basis of this “finance capital”, of a financial oligarchy; (3) the export of capital as distinguished from the export of commodities acquires exceptional importance; (4) the formation of international monopolist capitalist associations which share the world among themselves, and (5) the territorial division of the whole world among the biggest capitalist powers is completed. Imperialism is capitalism at that stage of development at which the dominance of monopolies and finance capital is established; in which the export of capital has acquired pronounced importance; in which the division of the world among the international trusts has begun, in which the division of all territories of the globe among the biggest capitalist powers has been completed.

[Distant Observer]

73. China has written some books on this.

[joshcryer]

28. Do you think the caricature in the OP is an accurate portrayal of the rebels?

If so, then I think you have issues of islamaphobia to resolve.

Your comment is tantamount to saying "who else isn't surprised by this?" with regards to the http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Justice/2011/0812/Wisconsin-State-Fair-mob-attack-Police-seek-hate-crime-charges">Wis. state fair mobbing.

FYI I saw a comment in that vein on right wing sites.

And it wasn't meant as a critique toward the oppressive capitalist city of West Allis.

[white_wolf]

33. Hardly Islamaphobie. Though I do have NATOphobie.

Oh and before you call me "Islamaphobic" you should know I've written a couple of articles on my college's news website condemning the actions of the people opposing the Murfreesboro mosque, granted they never got published, but write them I did.

Let me make this clear: I fully support the people of Libya or any people overthrowing an oppressive government, and institution one of their choosing. No matter what kind of government it is, but I do not think that is what is happening here. I really fear Libya will end up nothing more than another puppet state like Iraq and Afghanistan.

[joshcryer]

34. So you do not believe the caricature in the OP?

You don't believe that racism is a hallmark of the revolution?

[PurityOfEssence]

54. So you're tarring this poster as a hater of Islam

That's a personal attack and a shrieking attempt at ad hominem pillorying. Shout down the opposition by playing on sympathies, crush opposition by branding them as bigots, stop at nothing to keep your worldview dominant.

This is disgusting.

[joshcryer]

56. No, it is a fact. Calling "bloody racism" the "hallmark" of the revolution...

...is simply http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=1836579&mesg_id=1848022">par for the course. It takes an impeccable lack of judgment to see the OP otherwise.

[white_wolf]

85. I don't know what that has to do with me as I never posted in that thread you linked.

The fact is this, the rebels are a reactionary force and are possibly made up of tribes that used to support Idris back in the day. This is not a legitimate revolution of the working class,and things will likely be worse for them under the new regime than under Gaddaffii, I really hope you are right and I am wrong, and if so I'll post a thread on these forums admitting it. You can bookmark this post for reference.

[Distant Observer]

120. Don't worry. Some posters go after anyone that contradicts the propaganda line

[Liberal_in_LA]

8. k&r

[riverwalker]

11. confused about this

photos today of the rebels fighting for Bani Walid show plenty of very black faces fighting against Gaddafi.

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=205814822817675&set=a.205814409484383.54201.133738650025293&type=1&theater#!/photo.php?fbid=205814882817669&set=a.205814409484383.54201.133738650025293&type=1&theater&pid=578516&id=133738650025293

and early on, there was evidence of mercenaries. Some critical thinking and individual research is in order.

[joshcryer]

14. It's mostly made up nonsense and fearmongering.

There are isolated incidences but they pale in comparison to the acts Gaddafi committed.

[Distant Observer]

17. You have been denying facts since the killings and rapes in Benghazi in the beginning

You clearly don't have any personal experience in that part of Africa and seem to rabidly deny even western media reports of anything counter to Western propaganda.

Even the NYTIMES and BBC reporters have occasionally acknowledge the widespread detention and killings of blacks without any evidence of their involvement.

[joshcryer]

21. That is patently false, I have not denied one report. I merely do not believe it is systematic.

And you will fail to provide one bit of evidence that suggests that it is systematic on the side of the rebels.

[Distant Observer]

27. How many people do you know in the region? Do you know anything outside of western propaganda?

[Distant Observer]

36. Tell that to the thousands dead and the 10's of thousands who are fleeing the rebel onslaught

Every other day there are reports of mass graves of unreported dead and murdered. Even official reports show the terrifying impacts of this civil war.

-----

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_2011_Libyan_civil_war

Deaths caused by Anti-Gaddafi forces

Among the security forces there had been more than 1,700 dead, including civilians in support of the government, alleged mercenaries <12> and government soldiers. There have been many reports that members of the security forces have been killed by both the government and the opposition.

On February 18, two policemen were hanged by protesters in Benghazi.<13> Also, on the same day, 50 alleged African mercenaries, mostly from Chad, were executed by the protesters in al-Baida. Some of them were killed when protestors burned down the police station in which they locked them up<14> and at least 15 were lynched in front of the courthouse in al-Baida.<15> The bodies of some of them were put on display and caught on video.<16><17> By February 23, the government confirmed that 111 soldiers had been killed.<18>

On February 23, a group of 22 government soldiers attempted to make a breakout from an air base near Derna, which had been under siege for days by rebel fighters. Within hours, all of them were captured and eventually 12 of them were shot execution style while a 13th was hanged by the opposition forces.<19> Between February 15 and May 22, 37 former government loyalists were killed in Benghazi in revenge killings by some opposition groups.<20>

Toward the end of the Battle of Misrata (February 18, 2011 – May 15, 2011), at least 27 sub-Saharan Africans from Mali, Niger or Chad, who were accused of being mercenaries, were executed by rebel forces.<21>
Deaths caused by Coalition forces

The Libyan official sources claimed that at least between 64 and 90 people were killed during the bombardments on the first two days of the U.N. intervention and another 150 had been wounded.<22> The Vatican news agency confirmed that in Tripoli alone, at least 40 civilians died as a result of the bombing campaign.<23> According to the Libyan Health office, the airstrikes killed 1,108 civilians and wounded 4,500 by July 13.<24>

On April 1, NATO airstrikes killed 14 rebel fighters and wounded seven more on the frontline at Brega.<25>

On April 7, news reports surfaced that NATO bombers killed 10–13 rebels and wounded 14–22 near the eastern oil town of Brega.<26>

On April 27, at least one NATO warplane attacked the Libyan rebel forces position near the besieged city of Misrata, killing 12 fighters and wounding five others.<27>

On May 13, 11 religious imams were killed and 50 others injured when a NATO airstrike struck a large gathering in Brega praying for peace in conflict-ridden Libya.<28>

On June 19, at least nine civilians were killed in a NATO airstrike on Tripoli. Reporters saw bodies being pulled out of a destroyed building. NATO acknowledged being responsible for the civilians' deaths.<29>

On June 20, 15 civilians including three children were killed by another NATO airstrike on Sorman.<30>

On June 28, eight civilians were killed by a NATO airstrike on the town of Tawragha, 300 kilometres (190 miles) east of Tripoli.<31>

On July 25, 11 civilians were killed<32> by a NATO airstrike on a medical clinic in Zlitan.<33>

On July 30, 3 journalists were killed and 15 wounded in Nato attacks against the Libyan state TV Al-Jamahiriya, which continued to broadcast after the attacks.<34>

On August 9, the Libyan government claimed that 85 civilians were killed in NATO airstrikes on Majer, a village near Zlitan.<35> A NATO spokesman confirmed that they bombed Zliten at 11:45 p.m. on August 8, 2011 and 2:34 a.m. on August 9, 2011<36> but said that he was unable to confirm the casualties. The Libyan government declared three days of national mourning. Reporters were later taken to a hospital where they saw at least 30 dead bodies including the bodies of at least two young children. The Libyan government claimed that the bodies of others killed in the airstrikes were taken to other hospitals.<37> Commander of the NATO military mission in Libya, Lieutenant General Charles Bouchard said "I cannot believe that 85 civilians were present when we struck in the wee hours of the morning, and given our intelligence. But I cannot assure you that there were none at all".<38>

[pinboy3niner]

37. If you're claiming "thousands of dead" you really need a link

That's a very serious allegation--and one I haven't seen any credible source making.

[Distant Observer]

38. Link added, but who knows how many. My calls to friends suggests many deaths in every city that has

resisted the rebel onslaught.

[joshcryer]

46. None of the mass graves have yet to have black African's. All of them appear to be anti-Gaddafi.

[Distant Observer]

50. This is a blatant falsehood. And you should know better.

There have been many occasions when reporters and human rights workers seeking evidence against Gaddafi have concluded that mass graves are likely pro-graddafi.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wqKKiUXgiL8

[joshcryer]

52. Provide one credible source.

[Distant Observer]

71. "Credible?" By that do you mean Anti-Gaddafi source whose goal is to scrub any counter evidence?

OK, here's a start:

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/africa/2011/09/2011915235553251868.html

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-14875538


Even the NYTIMES has to acknowledge the racist context while sanitizing details of the atrocities.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/05/world/africa/05migrants.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&hpw


Many Tripoli residents — including some local rebel leaders — now often use the Arabic word for “mercenaries” or “foreign fighters” as a catchall term to refer to any member of the city’s large underclass of African migrant workers. Makeshift rebel jails around the city have been holding African migrants segregated in fetid, sweltering pens for as long as two weeks on charges that their captors often acknowledge to be little more than suspicion. The migrants far outnumber Libyan prisoners, in part because rebels say they have allowed many Libyan Qaddafi supporters to return to their homes if they are willing to surrender their weapons.

The detentions reflect “a deep-seated racism and anti-African sentiment in Libyan society,” said Peter Bouckaert, a researcher with Human Rights Watch who visited several jails. “It is very clear to us that most of those detained were not soldiers and have never held a gun in their life.”

[EFerrari]

19. The raping of black women and the rounding up of black people

by the rebels has been widely reported. You might want to do a quick search.

[joshcryer]

23. Every event known is in the Libyan Revolution thread, as far back as March.

Yes, it happens. But it is by no means systematic as the daily DU threads are attempting to make people believe.

[Distant Observer]

24. You meen events acknowledged even by Western media - most have not been reported

for obvious reasons. The stories of thousands of blacks fleeing since the "rebels" began their campaign have never been reported. We don't even have pictures of the 10's of thousands that have had to abandon homes and cities and are crossing southern borders in fear.

Don't worry, soon the entire history of this bloody atrocity will have been whitewashed and you can happily continue the pretense.

[joshcryer]

26. That is false, the events are reported. Most of your reports are as much as a...

...whole month old.

You'll claim it's white washed even after Amnesty and Human Rights Watch, and IOM do their reports and your falsehoods are washed away.

It is tragic and horrible when anyone is killed for racial or ethnic or religious reasons.

It is almost as tragic and horrible and detestable when people use a group to score political points for no particular reason.

It will take Libya decades to undo the xenophobic racism that Gaddafi fomented his entire reign.

[Distant Observer]

29. Do you ever ask why the few civilian deaths from Nato bombs are of rebels and their supporters

for the most part.

You really believe that collateral death seeks out locations staffed by western reporters or hospitals with western educated anti-Gaddafi doctors? Civilians weren't being "accidentally" killed all over the place.

Are you so totally naive? Is it possible that you have lived all your life sheltered from reality?

[joshcryer]

30. Can you have a discussion without making things personal? Because I don't have time for this.

[Distant Observer]

31. Might be time to save the Syrians, or the Bahraini, or the Congolese. The Libyans are now "FREE"

to to enjoy the blood and death of liberation.

[PurityOfEssence]

48. Have you never resorted to personal slurs to support your cause?

Have you not twisted and dodged and continually used the word "dishonest" against those who oppose your worldview? Have you not gone to ridiculous lengths to combat solid proof that this war was in violation of the UN Participation Act, the War Powers Resolution and even NATO's very rules? Have you not deliberately misled casual observers with untruths in your subject line to sway the casual reader? Have you not gone to great lengths to dismiss the obvious evidence that Qaddafi's threats of nationalization gave the oil-hungry French and English considerable motive to destroy him?

As for your lack of time, you have plenty to aggrandize yourself as the champion of the weak, defender of the President and defender of sovereignty-violating WAR to do as you please.

[joshcryer]

51. Not usually.

It's difficult, but I'm sure I've had a heated exchange here or there. Otherwise I do attempt to avoid making things personal. I cannot say the same for you (as the past few weeks all you have ever done when responding to me is make it so).

[PurityOfEssence]

60. hahahahahahahahahahhaha!

Butter wouldn't melt in your mouth, would it? You habitually call people "dishonest" and go for the emotional jugular of anyone not adhering to your worldview.

Beyond that, you see it as your duty to throw up endless flak and misrepresentations when confronted with detailed, specific, statutory proof of the illegality of this armed thievery.

I admit my combativeness, as does Distant Observer, but you and certain other pro-war interventionists revel in exalting themselves as innocent and honorable. This is shameful.

[joshcryer]

62. I stick to facts, I cannot say the same for others.

If I find that one who has been given the facts continues to parrot falsehoods, I am not going to apologize for pointing it out.

[PurityOfEssence]

79. When repeatedly shown the FACTS of the UN Participation Act, you repeatedly dodged and denied

It is a FACT that the President needs Congressional authorization for a Special Agreement with the Security Council to make forces available under a call-up under Article 42. You were repeatedly shown this, along with commentary before Congress from Dean Acheson, and you persisted in making insulting attacks in headers and playing word games.

The same thing with the War Powers Resolution, claiming that the President could attack whomever he pleased as long as the 48 hours and 60 days were obeyed. He cannot. It went on and on, including silly misinterpretations of what "pursuant" means, and then ignoring dictionary definitions.

This kind of smug moral superiority is revolting, especially when skewing facts and omitting inconvenient information yourself. The very idea of being outraged at being called out for anti-social behavior is nauseating when doing it so often yourself.

[PurityOfEssence]

57. Qaddafi was NOT a xenophopic racist; the rebels, on the other hand, seem to have a problem with this

Qaddafi, for all his many faults, seems to be rather color blind. The Benghazi Islamists and the Berbers, on the other hand, have a rather bad record on this. There isn't even the slightest justification for such an accusation.

[joshcryer]

61. "Qaddafi, for all his many faults, seems to be rather color blind."

http://www.unwatch.org/site/apps/nlnet/content2.aspx?c=bdKKISNqEmG&b=1313923&ct=8411733">You've http://www.cedipost.com/bloggers/gaddafi-on-“black-europe”-islamization-project-for-black-africans-a-response.html">got to http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/08/19/1007296/-Helter-Skelter:-Qaddafis-African-Adventure">fucking be kidding me.

:rofl:

[Distant Observer]

20. There is a wide rage of cultures and skin colors in Libya including non-arab and non-Euro Libyans

who are dark-skinned and who may or may not have supported the Gaddafi regime.

There has been, however, historically a strong racist tendency in the high-culture of Cyrenaica (the East) which had a long history of participation in the slave trade -- selling black Africans to Europe and Arabia.

[Starry Messenger]

12. k&r

[Bonobo]

13. Half of them wanted to kill Qaddafi because they thought he was Jewish. nt

[EFerrari]

22. I've seen no reports of "kill the Jews" graffiti following the rebels

from city to city as "kill the blacks" has.

[Distant Observer]

25. But there were reports of "Gaddafi - Secret Jew" graffiti in Benghazi and such at the beginning

[inwiththenew]

15. Mission Accomplished

:sarcasm:

[EFerrari]

18. K&R

[Distant Observer]

35. The Libya VICTORY could be Obama's bloody African legacy if he looses 2012

Really sad if that is all that is remember about the first African American President.

[mainer]

39. Why was there so little DU protest at the beginning of this mess?

When DUers first started posting about these so-called brave and glorious revolutionaries, and how Ghadafi was the ultimate Satan and needed to be annihilated, I posted some dire warnings that post-revolutionary Libya could be a bloodbath and that women would suffer the most with Ghadafi gone. I was shouted down and banned from those threads because I was being "provocative." Yet I was one of the few who'd ever been to Libya.

Now it seems folks are starting to realize that Libya today may be a far more frightening place than it ever was under Ghadafi.

[blindpig]

40. Arab Spring...

It was in the air and NATO took advantage of that in it's propaganda offensive. Many otherwise astute observers assumed it was the same as Tunisia and Egypt. Further observation and the actions and statements from NATO proved otherwise. Admittedly I was fooled for a few days. Now despite overwhelming evidence some continue to carry water for the imperialists. Or mebbe it ain't 'despite'.

[joshcryer]

41. Huh? DU was vehemently against aiding the rebellion from the start.

I http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x721946">remember it well.

No, you are completely wrong, the same posts have been repeated ad nausea for months and months. Everything from "the rebels are CIA" to "the rebels are terrorists" to "the rebels are racists" (see here).

[pinboy3niner]

42. You forgot...

..."the rebels are jihadists." :)

Terra, Terra, Terra!1!!

[joshcryer]

43. Oh, who could forget?

It's repeated here still weekly. :hi:

[pinboy3niner]

47. I think...

...the germs of Syria and the rats of Libya would salute you for that. :)

:patriot:

[joshcryer]

53. Indeed.

Just so you know I'm done responding to these guys, I suggest you do the same for sanity.

[Distant Observer]

44. As usual, you provide a special perspective that others have not appreciated

The whole Libya SCAM was garbed in Arab Spring rhetoric. It was viewed as horrid not to support the "defenseless protestors."

[joshcryer]

45. Did you not read what I wrote? DU was against aiding them, overwhelmingly.

Your join-date is not a coincidence.

[pinboy3niner]

55. Indeed.

:)

[PurityOfEssence]

67. Bullshit. Prove it. The overwhelming view here was that Obama was right and we should wage war

Tally up the posts and the posters. You made the contention, so please prove it. This is not the Soviet Union, where the accused has to prove his/her innocence, this is a land where an accuser is burdened with proving the case.

Those of us opposed to this WAR were in a distinct minority and still are.

[joshcryer]

70. Sure.

early polls: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x681927

http://upload.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x695647

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x538486

possible outlier: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x701202

later polls:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x693256

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1832966

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x739744

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x714274

http://upload.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x731645

possible outlier: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x679220

I will assume this is not sufficient anyway, even though I always provide you substance when you ask.

[PurityOfEssence]

86. This actually shows us both to be a bit off-base, and shows a rather even split.

General Discussion is a much more hostile forum to the President, though, so it would be interesting to see polls from General Discussion Presidency.

We both engaged in a bit of hyperbole, and my assertion that DU was overwhelmingly for it takes a hit here, but these polls truly contradict your claim that "DU was against aiding them, overwhelmingly", and still shows DU skewing for the war.

Poll 1: March 18th: 23 for war, 20 against

Poll 2: March 20: 30 for war, 40 against

Poll 3: This was done on March 2nd, well before the hysterical claims of a Benghazi massacre had been used to gin up war fever, so I do not feel that this should be included.

Poll 4: March 20th: 150 for war, 155 against, 6 "other" pretty much dead even

Poll 5: March 20th: 128 for war, 171 against

Poll 6: This was in late August, so is not representative. It is decidedly against, though, so it runs contrary to my assertion that DU is still for it.

Poll 7: Inapplicable; it posits what kind of government will emerge.

Poll 8: March 22: The only poll that directly addresses your point of whether DU is for or against. These people seem to be a bit wiser than either of us, with 47% saying that DU is Divided, 18% saying that DU supports the war and 0% saying that DU is against it. This should be considered as for the war.

Poll 9: This inapplicable; it's about the duration of the war.

Poll 10: March 18th: 38 for war, 21 against and 3 undecided. That's 61% for, 34% against.

So let's recap:

You clip and post 10 polls, of which only 7 are applicable to addressing the assertion of whether DU is for or against the war. Three of them show DU for the war, three of them show it to be against it and one is a dead heat (#4) with a large sampling, so it should be considered effectively a tie; some of the "other" voters in that poll stated that in some circumstances they could be for action.

My assertion of DU being overwhelmingly for the war does not hold up when seeing these, but your contrary one doesn't either. Using a poll from March 2nd is far too premature; none of the hysteria about black mercenaries and "genocide" had been brought up yet

Do you really expect people to not read what you post?

These are all from General Discussion, too, which is not as friendly a forum to the President as General Discussion Presidency.

[PurityOfEssence]

65. What a ridiculous crock of shit

The interventionists have ALWAYS had the upper hand on this board. You've enjoyed greater numbers, bolstered by the Obama acolytes who would back him with glee if he stomped little bunnies with steel-toed boots.

There were very few real dissenters, and we were constantly being berated as unfeeling assholes who didn't care about the innocent rebels against tyranny or as lovers of Qaddafi.

Having had the upper hand all these months, you're now going to suck pity for having been downtrodden? This is laughable.

[joshcryer]

66. No, that's false. Go back. My journal is a full history.

The Libya Revolution threads went months with negative recs. Meanwhile almost all information related to Libya was sequestered in those threads while hundreds and hundreds of Libya bashing posts were posted in GD. We got one thread to discuss Libya information, meanwhile many other threads were created to bash Libya.

Hell we actually got a kick out of it how the Libyan Revolution thread actually got positive recs for the first time (around when Tripoli was taken).

edit: clarification

[Distant Observer]

78. Well said. As in Libya, majority opinion was overwhelmed by minority rhetorical vehemence

[Starry Messenger]

102. Right the fuck on.

:thumbsup:

[polly7]

104. Bingo. nt.

[PurityOfEssence]

63. Go back and look: there was considerable dissent

Some of us were more focused on the sheer illegality of the operation and the immorality of violating national sovereignty. Some of us were focused on the social issues.

Nonetheless, there was PLENTY of disgust at this bit of imperial recklessness.

DU should be proud that there was as much opposition, and the record is clear.

[chill_wind]

75. Oh there was. And they were hurled at and labeled "Ghadafi-lovers"

and "Pro-Ghadafi" DUers and of course "Haters".

[sabrina 1]

82. I think initially when Libyans first started protesting

it seemed to be a repeat of what was happening in Egypt and Tunisia, but early on people (speaking for myself) began to notice things that were vastly different, such as the treatment of the African immigrants which I found very disturbing from the start. And I think it's fair to say that most withdrew their support fairly early on and were castigated for it. The DUer who started the threads on Libya, posted a thread explaining why she could no longer do so.

Iraqis had also joined the protests in an attempt to make certain demands of their puppet government, such as the end of occupation and the removal of all military bases from their country. And other demands such as jobs etc. Those protests were brutally dealt with with 29 Iraqis shot to death on the first day and hundreds arrested and thrown in jail.

The US media did not cover those protests, which continued all over Iraq. And when asked for a comment on the brutality of the crackdown by our 'democratic ally', only one comment was forthcoming which basically attempted to avoid an answer.

So, the Iraq demonstrations and the Libyan armed revolt made it clear to some of us, that the West was not going to be taken off guard with any more Egyptian style revolutions where they were left with no choice but to withdraw, however reluctantly, support for their 'good friends and allies, Ben Ali and Mubarak'.

[malaise]

58. Excellent post

Rec for truth

[AverageJoe90]

59. Problem is, 99% of the racism is probably coming from just the jihadis......

....and the jihadis never wanted democracy in the first place. It's been known for some time that Islamist organizations like the Muslim Brotherhood have been all too eager to hijack the Arab Spring movement, and if even some of the things described here are true, then it is likely mostly being done not by real rebels, but by jihadists who infiltrated their ranks and are trying to destroy their reputation.
It makes a LOT of sense when you really think about it........Gadhafi hated blacks. The real rebels don't.

[Prometheus Bound]

64. Why do you say "Gadaffy hated blacks"?

Where does that come from?

[Distant Observer]

69. Because truth does not matter in the propaganda war. Statement is a total falsehood. But who cares?

[Cerridwen]

77. Human Rights Watch has reports of gaddafis treatment of black Africans

migrant workers, and other foreigners, going back to at least 2000; those are in addition to how he treated Libyans. That's just at their web site. I don't know what they have in their paper files.

They've documented horrific human rights abuses over the years. Forced deportations to countries in which it was certain the people would be killed. Mass executions. Land mines. Underground prisons. Mass graves. Oh yeah, and the ever present, rape of male and female prisoners.

http://www.hrw.org/search/apachesolr_search/libya?page=16

Start at page 16 and work your way into the present. Not all those reports are specific to gaddafi; many are.

[Prometheus Bound]

107. I tried, but gave up trying to find evidence there that Gadaffy hates blacks.

[Cerridwen]

110. I haven't a clue who gaddafi *hates*. his record appears to indicate he'll

exploit anyone and everyone as long as he can benefit and he doesn't much care how much blood he has to spill.

[Distant Observer]

116. Any actual facts? Or just the usual selective propaganda against tyrants we don't control

[Cerridwen]

117. Do try to keep up. My post just above the one you chose has HRW info.

It was one in a series which created a discussion. A very short and easy to catch up on one at that.

[AverageJoe90]

109. Thanks for the info. n/t

[AverageJoe90]

111. You sound like a Republican.

After all, they were the ones who opposed this (legitimate, if perhaps at risk of being as badly botched as Afghanistan was) war for the most part, am I right?

[BOG PERSON]

94. Libya and Africa: Pogrom

Oct 12th 2000 | from the print edition

PLANELOADS of bodies, dead and alive, flew back to West Africa from Tripoli this week, after Libya’s worst outbreak of anti-foreigner violence since the expulsion of Italians and Jews in Muammar Qaddafi’s coup in 1969. Survivors told of pogroms.

Emeka Nwanko, a 26-year-old Nigerian welder, was one of hundreds of thousands of black victims of the Libyan mob. He fled as gangs trashed his workshop. His friend was blinded, as Libyan gangs wielding machetes roamed the African townships. Bodies were hacked and dumped on motorways. A Chadian diplomat was lynched and Niger’s embassy put to the torch. Some Nigerians attacked their own embassy after it refused refuge to nationals without proper papers—the vast majority.

Libyans sheltering Africans were warned that their homes would be next. Some of Libya’s indigenous 1m black citizens were mistaken for migrants, and dragged from taxis. In parts of Benghazi, blacks were barred from public transport and hospitals. Pitched battles erupted in Zawiya, a town near Tripoli that is ringed with migrant shantytowns. Diplomats said that at least 150 people were killed, 16 of them Libyans. The all-powerful security forces intervened by shooting into the air.

African migrants, unfairly blamed for the disaster, were detained en masse. They once numbered over 1m but diplomats say that they have now mostly disappeared from the streets, and are in hiding or in camps pending expulsion. Over the past fortnight, hundreds of thousands of black migrants have been herded into trucks and buses, driven in convoy towards the border with Niger and Chad, 1,600km (1,000 miles) south of Tripoli, and dumped in the desert.

http://www.economist.com/node/392844

[Prometheus Bound]

112. Gangs attacked black Africans; security forces intervened. How does this show Gaddafy hates blacks?

It sounds like there was local government involvement only in Benghazi, where blacks were barred from public transport and hospitals.

[Distant Observer]

114. How ironic. Obama putting genocidal power behind the notoriously racist Benghazi militants

After decades during which the Libyan Gov tried to keep them in check.

Certainly, there were many factions that opposed the Gaddafi regime for various reasons.
In Cyrenaica a major reason was a pernicious racism and hatred of Gaddafi pan-African and open-borders policies.

[AverageJoe90]

108. Here's a little quote from the 'Green Book':

" The black race is now in a very backward social situation. But such backwardness helps to bring about numerical superiority of the blacks because their low standard of living has protected them from getting to know the means and ways of birth control and family planning. Also their backward social traditions are a reason why there is no limit to marriage, leading to their unlimited growth, while the population of other races has decreased because of birth control, restrictions on marriage and continuous occupation in work, unlike the blacks who are sluggish in a climate which is always hot."

Apparently Cynthia McKinney felt a little uneasy when someone asked her about this quote......

[PurityOfEssence]

68. This is akin to a religious argument when talking about "real rebels"

First off, Qaddafi seems to be rather color-blind, and has NO history of hating blacks. Please substantiate that claim.

Beyond that, the Islamists are some of the real movers and shakers of this insurgency, and they DO have a seriously racist legacy.

Why I say that this is akin to a religious argument is that religious arguments constantly dismiss unpleasant acts stemming from the religion as not being from the true faith. Nobody from our group would ever do something like that; they're not really representative of us. Everything good comes from the group, while everything bad--even if done with the justification of the belief--is the act of a crazy person.

Qaddafi is no saint, but he had a decidedly pan-African view, and there is no evidence I've seen of him being racist. The rebels, on the other hand--and not just the "bad" rebels, but the Cyrenaican Islamists--have a horrible history of virulent racism.

[marmar]

72. Stop, you're messing with the "Liberation" narrative.

nt

[G_j]

76. time to pay attention.. K&R

[ProSense]

80. Here is Human Rights Watch

on Libya.

Amnesty International:

Libya: NTC must take control to prevent spiral of abuses

Libyan NTC pledges to investigate rights violations

There are atrociticies on both sides, but the OP seems a blatant attempt to spin the end of the Gaddafi regime as extremely negative.

[Distant Observer]

81. It's the bloody Western sponsored civil war that has been negative.

Western powers turned aside every effort to resolve the conflict without the montrous
destruction that has cause hatreds and bloodshed on all sides.

[sabrina 1]

83. How did you feel about the Iraq adventure? Was that positive

or not? The OP is merely telling the truth. Not everything has to do with the US and its two political parties. I initially supported this travesty I am ashamed to say. But as soon as it became clear it was another Western Imperial takeover of the resources of another ME/SA/African nation, I was as opposed to it as I was to the disastrous and illegal invasion of Iraq.

What is blatant to me is how Democrats in general opposed the Iraq War, rightfully so, but now it seems that opposition may not have been based on principles after all, but rather on party politics for some people. How sad that we don't make decisions based on what is right and what is wrong. This has been a rude awakening for many of us as I thought that Democrats were consistent regarding their principles.

We have zero business in these countries. NATO has now violated the resolution which did not include 'regime change' but which they are now not even denying. Not to mention, explain please what NATO is doing in a non-NATO country? Did Libya attack a NATO member?

To support this invasion of an African nation, and that is what it is by Western colonialists, is totally anti all the this country stands for as was Iraq, or so most Democrats said at the time.

[ProSense]

88. Hmmm?

"How did you feel about the Iraq adventure? Was that positive or not?"

What the hell does Libya have to do with Iraq?

"I initially supported this travesty I am ashamed to say. But as soon as it became clear it was another Western Imperial takeover of the resources of another ME/SA/African nation, I was as opposed to it as I was to the disastrous and illegal invasion of Iraq.

Right, because claiming it's a "Western Imperial takeover" means Libyan's would have been better off keeping Gaddafi?

[sabrina 1]

90. You didn't answer the question. So I'll phrase differently

Were Iraqis better off when we got rid of our former ally and dictator Saddam Hussein, and why didn't the left support that for the same reason you are using re Qadaffi? He too was a former ally, right up to last Jan. actually.

[ProSense]

92. Um,

"You didn't answer the question. So I'll phrase differently

Were Iraqis better off when we got rid of our former ally and dictator Saddam Hussein, and why didn't the left support that for the same reason you are using re Qadaffi? He too was a former ally, right up to last Jan. actually."

again, what the hell does Iraq (including all the events that led up to the illegal invasion) have to do with Liyba?

[sabrina 1]

95. Here are some obvious, glaring similarities.

Both have OIL.

Both had US Backed Dictators

Both threatened the profits of the Oil Corps.

Both were armed and supported by the West.

Both were eventually invaded with expat support, by the West.

Neither attacked the US or Europe.

The excuse given for both attacks are similar. Humanitarian reasons, liberate the populations.

Both had their futures planned in the West by Western Leaders and their unelected leaders 'recognized' by the West.

So, was Bush right after all? And are Iraqis better off today than they were before we invaded them?

[ProSense]

98. Um

"Both have OIL.

Both had US Backed Dictators

Both threatened the profits of the Oil Corps.

Both were armed and supported by the West.

Both were eventually invaded with expat support, by the West.

Neither attacked the US or Europe.

The excuse given for both attacks are similar. Humanitarian reasons, liberate the populations.

Both had their futures planned in the West by Western Leaders and their unelected leaders 'recognized' by the West.

So, was Bush right after all? And are Iraqis better off today than they were before we invaded them?"

...here's another, both are countries. That has as much to do with drawing a correlation between Iraq and Libya as the above nonsense.

Also, anyone who claims Libya threatened profits of Oil Corps clearly doesn't know what s/he is talking about.

"So, was Bush right after all? And are Iraqis better off today than they were before we invaded them?"

[sabrina 1]

100. Um, anyone who doesn't know what Qadaffi was threatening

is the one who doesn't know what s/he is talking about.

Still no answer to the question? It's a simple question. Why did we oppose Bush invading Iraq but support the invasion of Libya? I, eg, support neither, but I am seeing people who opposed the Iraq invasion support this one and it doesn't make sense.

[ProSense]

103. Well,

"Still no answer to the question? It's a simple question. Why did we oppose Bush invading Iraq but support the invasion of Libya? "

...some questions are too stupid to warrant an answer.

When did the U.S. invade Libya?

[sabrina 1]

106. They didn't invade Iraq either, they liberated it, remember?

And it wasn't the US, it was a 'coalition' of many nations 'concerned' about the Iraqi people! But of course no one was fooled then, nor are they now.

Iraqis were waiting to welcome them, and 70% of Americans believed that too. We even saw Iraqis pulling down the statue of Saddam and celebrating, just like Libya. They don't even change the script. Well, they did pay millions of dollars to the Rendon Group for that kind of PR advice, why NOT use it again?

The US sent drones to drop bombs on Libya. That is generally viewed as an act of war on a sovereign nation. NATO would not be there if the US was not there. The US could have vetoed the UN resolution to invade, because really, is anyone still calling it simply a cover to protect civilians? NATO is killing civilians. And they are refusing to protect Black Africans who are being slaughtered and tortured and held in captivity by the rebels. If protecting civilians is the purpose, why are not doing that?

We are in collusion with our war partners in Europe once again, invading an oil rich country. We have already installed a 'temporary' leader, over the one chosen by the rebels.

So, was Bush right after all in his claim to justify the invasion of Iraq, that the Iraqis would be 'better off without Saddam'? Yes or no, it's not a hard question. Maybe Democrats have changed their minds, maybe they are seeing what they did not see when Bush did it. Who knows? But they are making the same claims he made, so I'm curious as to why then he should not be exonerated by the Left.

[ProSense]

115. Wait

"They didn't invade Iraq either, they liberated it, remember?"

...they didn't invade Iraq? Really?

"So, was Bush right after all in his claim to justify the invasion of Iraq, that the Iraqis would be 'better off without Saddam'? Yes or no, it's not a hard question."

I didn't say it was "hard." I said it was stupid.

Since you said you initially supported the Libya mission, by your own logic (equating the two) did you support the illegal invasion of Iraq?

[sabrina 1]

118. I supported the Libyan protestors, BEFORE NATO got involved.

Once it became clear that this was not a people's movement but another Western intervention, I stopped supporting it. I don't support Imperial 'wars' even when they pretend to be for humanitarian purposes.

Re Iraq, it was not framed as an invasion, it was sold as a 'liberation'. We all know what it really was as we know what Libya is.

[sudopod]

123. The extent to which you have internalized the practice of doublethink terrifies and astonishes me.nt

[sudopod]

124. The extent to which you have internalized the practice of doublethink terrifies and astonishes me.nt

[sudopod]

122. Would Iraq have been better off with Saddam?

lol

[EFerrari]

87. There is no negative spin needed if you happen to be black in Libya. n/t

[chill_wind]

84. More details in Amnesty International 112-page report (September 13)

Libya: The battle for Libya: Killings, disappearances and torture

In mid-February 2011 Libyans called for a "Day of Rage" against the iron-fist rule of Colonel Mu'ammar al-Gaddafi, in power since 1969. The protests were met with lethal force. By early March the uprising had evolved into an armed conflict between forces loyal to Colonel al-Gaddafi and armed protesters coalesced into a loosely structured force led by the newly established National Transitional Council. This report documents serious and widespread human rights violations by al-Gaddafi forces and also abuses committed by the opposition


http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/info/MDE19/025/2011/en

.

[Amonester]

89. Even if you would 'pray' daily for any gaddafi to return to power: won't happen.

Name any violent revolution where all belligents were blameless.


(and no, no gaddafi's will ever rule again there)
(dream on all you want = won't happen)

[sabrina 1]

91. And we 'loved Saddam' too.

Anyone who opposes Western Imperialism just loves those dictators! So said the Right when we opposed the Iraq War. Did you think we all loved Saddam also?

I just love how the 'left' has adapted rightwing talking points lately.

Here's some info for you! It was our leaders who loved those dictators, Saddam and Qadaffi and Mubarak and Ben Ali, Karamov and Pinochet, and all the others they armed and supported and are still doing, for so long.

Btw, how do you feel about Karamov? Do you think the people of Uzbekistan need our help getting rid of him? This IS about the principled stand of opposing dictators, right?

[Amonester]

93. That's not what my 'won't happen' means.

It doesn't mean any 'love' for any dictator.

My 'won't happen' stance is just plain old reality.

Reality is, no gaddafi's will ever rule there again.

That's not to say no other 'like' them, and from 'either' side will ever rule there: Of that, I don't know, and nobody here can claim to know either.

I'll leave it at that for now.

[sabrina 1]

99. 'Dream on' and 'pray daily'

I guess people do not dream or pray for something they do not want desperately.

As for no Qadaffi ever returning to power, looks like the old king's followers are still around after all these decades.

Violent takeovers of countries even when successful, always leave generations of people who actually do dream and pray for a return of the leaders they believed in, as the flag that represented the decades old, long ago ruler of Libya prominently displayed by the rebels, demonstrated. They never forgot, now Qadaffi supporters will not forget. Of course with Western installed puppet governments and armed support from the West, the chances of those who opposed this rebellion succeeding are very slim.

What they need to pray for is that Libya runs out of oil, then they would have a chance.

We in America have a difficult time understanding these things and really don't care obviously, but when you think your legitimate government has been toppled with the help of your old foreign occupiers, you won't easily forget that. Such sentiments have created unrest in countries for generations.

NATO would have been better advised to try to work out a deal with Qadaffi to make it seem as though all parties got something they wanted. But NATO is a brutal, mindless military organization now, as seen in Afghanistan and Pakistan so finding peaceful ways of resolving issues is not something they would ever consider. All those arms sales eg, would be lost if peace was the goal.

[stevenleser]

129. I realize all you have in your philosophical toolbox is a hammer, so everything looks like a nail

but you will be doing yourself a favor if you stop analyzing everything in a way that seeks to frame it "all the same"

Of course this will probably fall on deaf ears.

[polly7]

131. Well I don't know about you, but I was told I wanted to have Saddam's babies!

Of course I'd heard the stories of how he tossed them from incubators, and so was reluctant to face such a fate for my little one.


Uzbekistan ...... isn't that the rendition place whose gov't had previously tortured people in boiling water? I think so, and if I remember correctly ..... they're among the good guys.

I know you weren't asking me these questions so I hope you don't mind that I replied to them.

[Distant Observer]

96. What is the bizzare Western fixation on Gaddafi. How much hatred and blood over this obsession.

[sabrina 1]

101. OIL!

And other resources. And the US is now committed to Africa as they were to the ME. Which is why we have Africom, not exactly a peaceful organization. We intend interfere in African countries militarily, as we are doing in Somalia and now Libya probably for the next century, unless someone stops us.

[PurityOfEssence]

119. R2P: Right to Petroleum

All roads lead to oil.

[Prometheus Bound]

113. It has proven to be a highly effective propaganda strategy.

You have to admit the propagandists have used it effectively.

[EFerrari]

97. So if you obect to lynchings, you're a Gaddafi lover? Really? n/t

[countryjake]

138. How does raising awareness of Racist Genocide equate to...

praying for Qaddafi? I haven't seen anyone in this thread sing any praises of that particular man! The fact that he posed a threat to Western Interest with his own private brand of nationalistic imperialist tendencies will very easily explain the rush to cram NATO forces into Libya (after all, he does sit upon most of the oil found in Africa).

However, with the ruse of propaganda, early on, of "black" mercenaries defending him (rather than the Libyan national forces, actual military, perhaps), printed and propagated by our very own mainstream media, wouldn't ya think that NATO itself should be alarmed now, that one third of the citizens of a nation it has "liberated" are huddling in fear, targets of reprisal due to the color of their skin? That utter silence is deafening!

Sit up and take notice, war crimes are war crimes, whether perpetrated by a former leader or those forces who ousted him!

[Name removed]

105. Deleted message

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

[Distant Observer]

121. BBC Report just re-confirmed systematic rape and murder of blacks by NTC forces in Tripoli

[polly7]

125. It's a Bad Time to be a Black man in Libya

Amnesty International: It's a Bad Time to be a Black man in Libya

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kDRbdXp0Du4&feature=player_embedded#!

[countryjake]

139. and I would guess, even worse to be a Black woman...

thank you for that vid...disturbing...

[countryjake]

126. How "humanitarian" of NATO...

and the genocide of Western Imperialism sweeps on. I came here sometime back in May or June (had to dig out a long-unused password to do it), just to see if the folk here were deducing the same sick feeling of a CIA usurped "revolution" that I was figgering. Sorry to say, the whoopla kept me from returning to read more on the "hunt for Qaddafi" and about so many of those Precision "mistake" NATO Strikes aimed directly at innocent (bona-fide revolutionaries) "civilians".

And I also wondered, back then, how our government would try and explain away that discovery, quite awhile back, of a mass grave containing the bodies of bound and executed blacks. I think it was the NYT which dismissed that as "mercenary Qaddafi fighters". But to hear our own ambassador and mainstream media plop a splattering whitewash on the systematic rape of black women refugees in Libya, to read of the sheer terror that minorities are experiencing as a result of this transition...tell me, when exactly will the progressives of this nation take a stand against ANY inhumane atrocities and genocide conducted under the guise of "regime change", "nation-building", or "peace-processes"?

[Whats_Happening]

127. I'm betting you're Serbian, "distant observer" aren't you?

You've STILL got a bee in your bonnet that NATO didn't let you people steamroll over Kosovo, and so now you feel impelled to stand up for a 40-year sociopathic dictator just because NATO played a key role in bringing him down.

:shrug:

[polly7]

130. Kosovo - Libya ?? Thank goodness you could connect them with the word

NATO. What kind of connection are you trying to make between the two?

[court jester]

134. So sometimes PNAC plans are good, and othertimes they're bad...

Kosovo was a PNAC plan, as I learned right here on this site


http://newamericancentury.org/balkans.htm

Cohen (Clintons Republican "defense" secy) said there "may be 100,000 dead albanians in mass graves", kind of like the lies about Kaddafi going to "commit genocide"

The FBI and the UN found no mass graves

But clusterbombs were detonated over marketplaces
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cluster_bombing_of_Nis

TV Stations in downtown Belgrade were bombed
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO_bombing_of_the_Radio_Television_of_Serbia_headquarters



Lots of "Shock and Awe" and

Why aren't these people surrendering after a few days?

then there's the Base we will never leave, which couldn't have been built without the war
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camp_Bondsteel
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_25RWm7Cm9IM/R7wuXXwKeFI/AAAAAAAAAO4/luVOhZyzB48/s400/Picture+1.png

[countryjake]

136. thanks for that reminder of more NATO "freedom fighting"...nt.

!

[Prometheus Bound]

128. BBC: Libya conflict: Black African migrants caught in backlash

18 September 2011 Last updated at 16:55 GMT

Libya conflict: Black African migrants caught in backlash

A BBC investigation has found allegations of abuse against African migrant workers in Libya by fighters allied to the new interim authorities.

Hundreds of men have been imprisoned, accused of being mercenaries for Col Muammar Gaddafi, and there are claims that homes have been ransacked and looted, and women and girls have been beaten and raped.

.....The fighters forced their way into the Nigerian family's home. They beat the couple living there. They stole their possessions and money, abducted the father of the house and turned on his 16-year-old daughter. She told us what happened:

"A group of armed men came to our house. They started knocking, they came in saying 'murtazaka'. They locked my mother inside a toilet. Six of them raped me. They took our belongings and money. My father tried to stop them but they hit him and carried him away."

That was nearly three weeks ago and she has not seen or heard of her father since.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-14965062

[Prometheus Bound]

132. Amnesty: Libyan rebels may be guilty of war crimes

Amnesty: Libyan rebels may be guilty of war crimes
By DON MELVIN, Associated Press – 6 days ago

BRUSSELS (AP) — Rebels fighting to topple Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi committed unlawful killings and torture, Amnesty International said in a report released on Tuesday.

...."Members and supporters of the opposition, loosely structured under the leadership of the National Transitional Council (NTC) ... have also committed human rights abuses, in some cases amounting to war crimes, albeit on a smaller scale," the Amnesty report said.

It said opposition supporters "unlawfully killed" more than a dozen Gadhafi loyalists and security officials between April and early July. And just after the rebels took control of eastern Libya, the report said, angry groups of rebel supporters "shot, hanged and otherwise killed through lynching" dozens of captured soldiers and suspected mercenaries, with impunity.

..."In February, there was this rumor about Gadhafi using black people as mercenaries; that's wrong," Nicolas Beger, director of the Amnesty International European Institutions office, told Associated Press Television News in Brussels on Monday. "But the NTC has not done a lot to curb that rumor and now there is a lot of retaliation against sub-Saharan Africans. Whether they were or they weren't involved with the Gadhafi forces, they are at real risk of being taken from their work or their homes or the street to be tortured or killed."

...The report also listed an extensive list of crimes allegedly committed by Gadhafi's regime. The loyalists killed and injured scores of unarmed protesters, made critics disappear, used illegal cluster bombs, launched artillery, mortar and rocket attacks against residential areas, and, without any legal proceedings, executed captives, the report said.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5j9KdNc0fsv6tQ1pul0fJPH1YUl_g?docId=7d70ac1c022d41f89681aff2cd2b96d9

[Distant Observer]

133. NO NO NO! We couldn't be supproting groups that routinely murder, rape, torture and lie. Could we?

Its only crazy Gaddafi "deadender" who do those things --until we kill them all.

[countryjake]

135. Black genocide in Libya - why the silence?

(I really wish that we didn't have to turn to the UK and other foreign countries to find common voices, but so it is)

http://www.obv.org.uk/news-blogs/black-genocide-libya-why-silence

"And Amnesty fear the reprisals and the Black genocide in Libya will continue. But the question remains, why have there been no statements issued by the White House or Downing Street condemning the violence against the Black population in Libya. And also, the rebels seem to be denying the same freedom to others which they have been fighting for in the removal of Gaddafi. So what makes them different from the previous regime?"

[Distant Observer]

140. Whether it is Georgia or Libya: Bad time to be a black man

[Prometheus Bound]

137. Prisons grow as rebels pursue their enemies and questions arise about the missing

Prisons grow as rebels pursue their enemies and questions arise about the missing
Posted on Sunday, September 18, 2011

TRIPOLI, Libya — The last time Hussein Ibrahim Saleh saw his brother Jamal was more than one month ago. On Saturday, Saleh received confirmation that his brother was body number 531 in a cemetery for fighters loyal to former Libyan dictator Moammar Gadhafi in Misrata, 120 miles east.

The majority of the more than 800 bodies and sets of remains in the "pro-Gadhafi" cemetery are without names or identification other than digital photos of their faces taken by the volunteers who run the cemetery. Many of the bodies have simply been left at the cemetery by the rebels to be buried, with no information about where they were killed or found.

In a revolution where rebel fighters have banded together in local groups answerable only to the communities they come from, much remains unresolved. One emerging problem is the apparent persecution of black Libyans and non-Libyan Africans, which has resulted in at least one instance of racial cleansing, as rebels from Misrata have pursued residents from the nearby predominantly black village of Tawergha, which many Libyans say offered support for Gadhafi. Residents also fled a predominantly black neighborhood in Misrata.

Prisoners from Tawergha captured in Tripoli after they fled fierce fighting in and around the village before it was taken by rebels August 15 have been taken back to prisons in Misrata, with the aid of rebel units in Tripoli.

....."The Misrata brigades are looking for people from Tawergha," Yousif said. "I was hit on the back of the head after they arrested me. They arrested me because I'm from Tawergha."

Read more: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2011/09/18/124456/prisons-grow-as-rebels-pursue.html#ixzz1YQyuIOwL