Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

R.I.P. Gaddafi


  • Please log in to reply
179 replies to this topic

#61    Q24

Q24

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,924 posts
  • Joined:12 Oct 2006

Posted 27 October 2011 - 09:08 AM

View Post747400, on 27 October 2011 - 06:54 AM, said:

So are people saying, just to make it clear, that on the whole they are sorry that Gadaffi was killed, because they feel sorry for him, or because he was actually loved by his people and he was actually killed by the America as part of a conspiracy for either Global domination or to get their hands on his Oil? Do you think that he was just a victim of America's perfidy and he wasn't that bad really, or no worse than a lot of others, or that he was that bad really, but should have been put on trial? And would people say, in their own personal opinion, that he was more bad or less than Bin L, and did either of them deserve their fate, or should the same considerations - that they should both have had to face the brunt of the Law - apply to both?
I do hope people don't just say "yes..." and then post the same YouTube video again.
I’m not sure anyone can speak for “on the whole” but it does appear there is a sizeable number of people who would answer “Yes” to all parts of your first question.  I would fall into that category to an extent; not exactly as you posed the question, but along those lines.

To the second question, it is without doubt that Gaddafi, after all the handshakes, was victim of a Western will to overthrow him.  Was he “bad” from whose perspective?  I don’t think Gaddafi was bad for Africa or the Middle East compared to others.  He certainly wasn’t bad for Libya - that is, the country and the majority of citizens.  Although he had moved toward normalizing relations with the West over more recent years, he was clearly still bad for the ambitions of Western leaders.

Lastly, I believe everyone should receive fair trial in a neutral court.  This mob lynching backed by U.S. and NATO bombs and also a U.S. assassination mission are not justice, but exactly what it says on the tin - lynching and assassination.  It is not justice, it is criminal!

Edited by Q24, 27 October 2011 - 09:10 AM.

Operation Northwoods was a 1962 plan by the US Department of Defense to cause acts of violence, blamed on Cuba, in order to generate U.S. public support for military action against the Cuban government. The plan called for various false flag actions, such as staged terrorist attacks and plane hijackings, on U.S. and Cuban soil.

#62    Scepticus

Scepticus

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 247 posts
  • Joined:22 Sep 2011
  • Gender:Male

  • Some people are too tired to give you a smile. Give them one of yours, as none needs a smile so much as he who has no more to give

Posted 27 October 2011 - 09:24 AM

View PostCorp, on 26 October 2011 - 04:05 PM, said:

The fact remains that the Arab League approved of a no-fly zone that they knew NATO would be enforcing.

True, but also they didn't approve any bombs hitting the ground. So the hole argument that the UN wanted the Arab league to aprove that NATO was allowed to do what they did, doesn't cut it.  ;)


View PostCorp, on 26 October 2011 - 04:05 PM, said:

The US was getting 0.5% of total Libyan oil exports. However US oil companies are irrelivant in this case because the US weren't the ones pushing for intervention into Libya. In fact they were largely dragging their feet. France and Britain, and later Italy, were the ones pushing for military intervention and they were the ones who flew the most combat missions. The US mainly provided support for the operations. Libya was a European operation not an American one and Europe was already getting 97.2% of Libya's oil exports. France was by far the most vocal and active in getting a military mission going and they were already getting about 15.7% of the total Libyan oil exports. So the only way the US is going to "control the oil" is by massively screwing over Europe, something Libya isn't about to do. So the argument that this whole conflict was about allowing the US to take over the Libyan oil industry don't hold any water.

Source: http://www.iea.org/f...facts_libya.pdf

http://205.254.135.2...s/Libya/pdf.pdf
Another source that shows US exports at 3% with named European countries making up 72% (and likely most of that 14% in 'Other'). Again Europe, who were the ones who wanted military intervention, was already getting the majority of Libyan oil. So what benefit was there to support the rebels? If they lost than kiss those oil deals goodbye. If this was truely about the oil than NATO would have either done nothing or would have backed Gaddafi. Again oil for war in this case just doesn't make sense.

Where did you get that from? Yes in the media France and the UK was those how took the lead. But do you what happened behinde the lines?

Do you know how much money the US spent on this hole thing? They spent about 1 billion dollars.

The hole idea that US wasn't that much involded is wrong. This is what the Obama administration wanted, to let people believe that their role wasn't that big. And i can see they pretty much succeeded.

There was a total of 19 countries involed in this affair. But only 6 nations joined the US and Canadian air strikes.  
Two senior NATO officials have been out saying on record, that the US have had a much bigger role than what you have learned from the media.

Who made it posssible for air strikes, taking down Libyas air defenses? The US.
Who refueled the majority of aircrafts bombing Libya? The US
Who supplied the ammunation to Norways, Denmarks amd Belgiums F-16s? The US
Why did the UK and France suddently make modifications to their aircraft? Because they were also low on ammo, and who supplied them with new ammo? Yes, the US.
How did NATO know where to bomb? From the help of the JSTARS surveillance aircraft and predator drones, which belongs to who? Yes, the US.
Who acted as air-traffic controllers on most of the strike missions? The US. The Europeans also had AWACS aircraft involded, but didn't have enough crews to handle an campaign lasting months. So US crews helped them out on this also.

My point is that the US was far more involded than people would like to think. And this is what the Obama administration wanted and they did a very good job. I most say i like this tactic.  

Did you also know that the US tried to spreed a computer virus though out Gaddafis military intelligence, but unfortunately failed.


P.S did you know Gaddafi was the richest man on this planet until this death? Personal fortune around 200 billion dollars

:D

Edited by Scepticus, 27 October 2011 - 09:26 AM.

The only way to get smarter is by playing a smarter opponent.

#63    bee

bee

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 11,076 posts
  • Joined:24 Jan 2007
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:England

Posted 27 October 2011 - 10:15 AM

thanks for that Scepticus...

and I would like to add this as well


http://www.independe...li-2304500.html

Quote

France has been covertly arming rebels in the mountains south of Tripoli eyeing a push on the Libyan capital to hasten the demise of Colonel Muammar Gaddafi’s 41-year regime.


and



Quote

But despite Western assistance, the revolt against Col Gaddafi’s regime that started in February has only made faltering gains, with rebels hampered by a lack of training, equipment and funding. Nato allies had until now limited themselves to delivering money and advice to the rebels, mainly in the east of Libya where rebels have formed a transitional council in Benghazi. British Foreign Secretary yesterday confirmed that £100 million had been transferred to rebels in Benghazi amid earlier complaints that promises of money had not materialised.


bolded.....surely there must be some law about the misappropriation of taxes?

when those taxes are used to fund the abuse and assassination of the leader of a sovereign state.


as far as I know...the British government hasn't even criticised the rebels.


if I had the time - money - knowledge of law - contacts.....I would be sorely tempted to take David Cameron to court over this


or at least see if it was possible.

someone within the legal profession should look into this...



.

Edited by bee, 27 October 2011 - 10:19 AM.


#64    bee

bee

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 11,076 posts
  • Joined:24 Jan 2007
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:England

Posted 27 October 2011 - 10:33 AM

Understanding the Green Book & Libyan politics, the easy way






what our politicians would rather we didn't know about Libya....


about Gaddafi's Libya...because it won't be like this any more


#65    Q24

Q24

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,924 posts
  • Joined:12 Oct 2006

Posted 27 October 2011 - 10:37 AM

View Postbee, on 27 October 2011 - 10:15 AM, said:

bolded.....surely there must be some law about the misappropriation of taxes?

when those taxes are used to fund the abuse and assassination of the leader of a sovereign state.


as far as I know...the British government hasn't even criticised the rebels.


if I had the time - money - knowledge of law - contacts.....I would be sorely tempted to take David Cameron to court over this


or at least see if it was possible.

someone within the legal profession should look into this...
:rofl:

Wishful thinking.

We don’t get a vote on how our taxes are spent.

If you want a withdrawal from funding foreign affairs and NATO then vote BNP.  No I don’t want to see the BNP in power - I have a couple of big disagreements with them - but a few seats to give some sort of influence in parliament could work wonders.  At the least it would frighten the big three into thinking twice on a number of issues.

Operation Northwoods was a 1962 plan by the US Department of Defense to cause acts of violence, blamed on Cuba, in order to generate U.S. public support for military action against the Cuban government. The plan called for various false flag actions, such as staged terrorist attacks and plane hijackings, on U.S. and Cuban soil.

#66    bee

bee

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 11,076 posts
  • Joined:24 Jan 2007
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:England

Posted 27 October 2011 - 10:49 AM

View PostQ24, on 27 October 2011 - 10:37 AM, said:

:rofl:

Wishful thinking.



well someone has to do it.... :)


All the stuff that happened about M.Ps  expenses not so long ago....and the court cases about that.

could that £100 million given to the rebels be construed as 'expenses' ???? illegal expenses?

I know I know...wishful thinking


#67    Q24

Q24

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,924 posts
  • Joined:12 Oct 2006

Posted 27 October 2011 - 11:11 AM

View Postbee, on 27 October 2011 - 10:49 AM, said:

well someone has to do it.... :)


All the stuff that happened about M.Ps  expenses not so long ago....and the court cases about that.

could that £100 million given to the rebels be construed as 'expenses' ???? illegal expenses?

I know I know...wishful thinking
There are clearly defined rules for expenses claims… it can be rather more murky for military spending.

But seriously bee, just out of interest, would you consider voting BNP to give some real opposition to this sort of UK intervention in Libya?

The views you have expressed are well in line with theirs on the issue: -


“This War is not in the interests of the people of Britain. It is not in the interest of genuine political reformers in the Middle East. It is not in the interest of ordinary Israelis, for it will inflame the anti-Semitism of the ‘Arab street’ every bit as much as it will turn more young Muslims into anti-Western terrorists.

The only good thing one can say about it is that this War will not turn out to be in the interest of the political elite either. The vast majority of the British people are already instinctively against their madcap foreign adventures. In the months ahead, that feeling will grow ever stronger. The appeal of the British National Party’s stand for Peace – shown clearly by the huge public sympathy for our campaign to bring our soldiers home from Afghanistan – will be magnified many times over.

We are going to position ourselves as the Peace Party, and millions who would rather see their taxes spent on tackling unemployment, saving essential services, helping pensioners and housing war veterans and their families, will realise that we are right.

http://www.bnp.org.u...-puppet-cameron



Operation Northwoods was a 1962 plan by the US Department of Defense to cause acts of violence, blamed on Cuba, in order to generate U.S. public support for military action against the Cuban government. The plan called for various false flag actions, such as staged terrorist attacks and plane hijackings, on U.S. and Cuban soil.

#68    bee

bee

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 11,076 posts
  • Joined:24 Jan 2007
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:England

Posted 27 October 2011 - 11:44 AM

View PostQ24, on 27 October 2011 - 11:11 AM, said:

There are clearly defined rules for expenses claims… it can be rather more murky for military spending.

perhaps the 'murkiness' of military spending could work in favour of what I said...in the
hands of a very clever barrister?

Quote

But seriously bee, just out of interest, would you consider voting BNP to give some real opposition to this sort of UK intervention in Libya?

no, because the build up for that kind of tactical voting could take decades...and still not bear fruit.


#69    Q24

Q24

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,924 posts
  • Joined:12 Oct 2006

Posted 27 October 2011 - 12:21 PM

View Postbee, on 27 October 2011 - 11:44 AM, said:

perhaps the 'murkiness' of military spending could work in favour of what I said...in the
hands of a very clever barrister?
If he was clever enough to infiltrate the top-level government and somehow pass his own laws which could form the basis of a case, perhaps.  At the moment he wouldn’t have a leg to stand on - I mean, what’s he going to fight the case on, an opinion?  The defence budget can be spent how politicians, departments and/or the military see as in best interest of the U.K.  If that includes handing over £100m of tax payers money to some rebel tribe halfway around the world that suits their agenda, well… the British public voted for the leaders making those decisions.


View Postbee, on 27 October 2011 - 11:44 AM, said:

no, because the build up for that kind of tactical voting could take decades...and still not bear fruit.
It could take one election.

So how would you plan on changing anything?

Edited by Q24, 27 October 2011 - 12:24 PM.

Operation Northwoods was a 1962 plan by the US Department of Defense to cause acts of violence, blamed on Cuba, in order to generate U.S. public support for military action against the Cuban government. The plan called for various false flag actions, such as staged terrorist attacks and plane hijackings, on U.S. and Cuban soil.

#70    Bildr

Bildr

    Remote Viewer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 575 posts
  • Joined:30 Mar 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Quebec Province(Canada)

  • “Enlightenment is not imagining figures of light but making the darkness conscious.” -Carl Gustav Jung

Posted 27 October 2011 - 12:23 PM

The real reason for the war in Libya, Gaddafi and his gold dinar
(Original audio in English)



Edited by Bildr, 27 October 2011 - 12:24 PM.

Posted Image


#71    Norbert Dentressangle

Norbert Dentressangle

    Convoi exceptionnel

  • Member
  • 26,101 posts
  • Joined:09 May 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tanybwlch

  • Vampires are people too.

Posted 27 October 2011 - 01:05 PM

View Postbee, on 27 October 2011 - 10:15 AM, said:

thanks for that Scepticus...

and I would like to add this as well


http://www.independe...li-2304500.html




and






bolded.....surely there must be some law about the misappropriation of taxes?

when those taxes are used to fund the abuse and assassination of the leader of a sovereign state.


as far as I know...the British government hasn't even criticised the rebels.


if I had the time - money - knowledge of law - contacts.....I would be sorely tempted to take David Cameron to court over this


or at least see if it was possible.

someone within the legal profession should look into this...



.
So you do feel sorry for the sinister little creep.
Did you also feel sorry for another former leader who included Libya in his empire, and suffered a very simialr fate, Benito Mussolini?

(does Godwin's Law apply to il Duce as well? Anyway, in this case it is a pertinent analogy, I think.)

Sorry, far as I'm concerned he was a victim of what happens when you provoke your own people too far.

Life is a hideous business, and from the background behind what we know of it peer daemoniacal hints of truth which make it sometimes a thousandfold more hideous.

H. P. Lovecraft.


:cat:


#72    bee

bee

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 11,076 posts
  • Joined:24 Jan 2007
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:England

Posted 27 October 2011 - 01:35 PM

View PostQ24, on 27 October 2011 - 12:21 PM, said:

If he was clever enough to infiltrate the top-level government and somehow pass his own laws which could form the basis of a case, perhaps.  At the moment he wouldn’t have a leg to stand on - I mean, what’s he going to fight the case on, an opinion?  The defence budget can be spent how politicians, departments and/or the military see as in best interest of the U.K.  If that includes handing over £100m of tax payers money to some rebel tribe halfway around the world that suits their agenda, well… the British public voted for the leaders making those decisions.

underlined...and therein lies the problem....the shortcomings of representative democracy.

the video I posted earlier... this one >> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jdeLv5lFPuw&feature=player_embedded

explained about Libya's Participatory democracy. Which no doubt 'the rebels' will be non too keen on.

and will abandon...without Gaddafi at the helm it would be unworkable and could be another reason he was removed.

So that this kind of Participatory Democracy, didn't spread through the African continent?


Quote

It could take one election.

you have to be realisic about what you are suggesting and it's not going to happen.

Quote

So how would you plan on changing anything?

don't want to get side-tracked  with this.. :) ..but briefly..I do what I can, when I can, when I feel like it.
I'm working at the moment but I'm tempted to go to London to the Occupy St Pauls demonstration.
Something big is going down world-wide with the grass-roots Occupy Wall Street and off shoot's of it.

Time will tell where it leads....but at the very least people will feel more empowered and involved.

And it could possibly be the start of a huge social/economic melt-down...?




@ bildr....thanks for that. I posted it earlier but it's interesting that it is being translated
and I wouldn't be surprised if it went viral


:tu:


#73    Corp

Corp

    Telekinetic

  • Member
  • 6,951 posts
  • Joined:19 Jun 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ottawa

Posted 27 October 2011 - 01:55 PM

View PostScepticus, on 27 October 2011 - 09:24 AM, said:

Where did you get that from? Yes in the media France and the UK was those how took the lead. But do you what happened behinde the lines?

Do you know how much money the US spent on this hole thing? They spent about 1 billion dollars.

The hole idea that US wasn't that much involded is wrong. This is what the Obama administration wanted, to let people believe that their role wasn't that big. And i can see they pretty much succeeded.

There was a total of 19 countries involed in this affair. But only 6 nations joined the US and Canadian air strikes.  
Two senior NATO officials have been out saying on record, that the US have had a much bigger role than what you have learned from the media.

Who made it posssible for air strikes, taking down Libyas air defenses? The US.
Who refueled the majority of aircrafts bombing Libya? The US
Who supplied the ammunation to Norways, Denmarks amd Belgiums F-16s? The US
Why did the UK and France suddently make modifications to their aircraft? Because they were also low on ammo, and who supplied them with new ammo? Yes, the US.
How did NATO know where to bomb? From the help of the JSTARS surveillance aircraft and predator drones, which belongs to who? Yes, the US.
Who acted as air-traffic controllers on most of the strike missions? The US. The Europeans also had AWACS aircraft involded, but didn't have enough crews to handle an campaign lasting months. So US crews helped them out on this also.

My point is that the US was far more involded than people would like to think. And this is what the Obama administration wanted and they did a very good job. I most say i like this tactic.  

Did you also know that the US tried to spreed a computer virus though out Gaddafis military intelligence, but unfortunately failed.


P.S did you know Gaddafi was the richest man on this planet until this death? Personal fortune around 200 billion dollars

:D

So your evidence that the US is behind everything is because we "don't know what happened behind the lines"? Ok I hereby declare that Fiji was behind Libya. Because "well it might have happened". Just because you want the US to be this super sneaky bad guy doesn't make it reality.

And there were nineteen different countries who committed military forces to the naval blockade and the air campaign. As for the US involved given that they have the largest military in NATO and are the main arms supplier it's hardly a shock that they had a large support role. They're going to play a huge role in any NATO operation. Doesn't mean they're running the show.

Who were the first to push for military intervention? France
Who said they were ready to launch air strikes within hours of a green light? France
Who were the first to recognize the NTC as the leaders of Libya? France
Who were the first to launch air strikes? France
Who hit the most military targets? France

Why ignore the evidence that it was France and other European countries who pushed for the Libyan intervention? Are they not "evil" enough? The whole 'oh the US is behind everything' bit is little more than wishful thinking.

War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things: the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth a war, is much worse...A man who has nothing which he is willing to fight for, nothing which he cares more about than he does about his personal safety, is a miserable creature who has no chance of being free, unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.

#74    bee

bee

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 11,076 posts
  • Joined:24 Jan 2007
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:England

Posted 27 October 2011 - 01:56 PM

View Post747400, on 27 October 2011 - 01:05 PM, said:

Sorry, far as I'm concerned he was a victim of what happens when you provoke your own people too far.


Have you taken in the stuff about the African Gold Dinar and did you notice the 1.7 million Libyans
at the rally in support of Gaddafi?

and have you watched this video I put here today >>>

anyway...we'll see how your 'rebels' get on and how the citizens of Libya fair under their rule.

I didn't think you were a fan of Cameron? But you approve of what he has done in our name?


#75    Q24

Q24

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,924 posts
  • Joined:12 Oct 2006

Posted 27 October 2011 - 02:37 PM

View Postbee, on 27 October 2011 - 01:35 PM, said:

you have to be realisic about what you are suggesting and it's not going to happen.
You are right - it’s unrealistic to expect citizens to put an ‘X’ in a box that matches their real views, they aren’t half smart enough for that, too easily led by the TV and newspapers, I have noticed.  I’m just saying that anyone who votes for the big three parties or any other which sits on the fence has no right to complain.  If they voted for what they really believed then the political reality could change overnight.


View Post747400, on 27 October 2011 - 01:05 PM, said:

Sorry, far as I'm concerned he was a victim of what happens when you provoke your own people too far.
It wasn’t his own people that otherthrew Gaddafi, it was a minority in Libya backed by the U.S. and NATO.

The rioting (or “demonstrations” in the Western media) began after some relatively minor dispute over housing development.  Those responsible attacked and set fire to police and government buildings, security forces initially moved in with water cannons and then, as will inevitably happen in a country with a recent history of brutal conflict, people started getting killed, this included police and security forces.

If the U.K. riots this year had been supported and armed by a foreign power to overthrow the British government, they could easily have grown out of control.  What if David Cameron or perhaps the Queen (she is a dictator of sorts) had been cornered, battered, bloodied, shot and put on public display?  Would you say they were a victim of what happens when you provoke your own people too far?  Or would it just be a result of foreign intervention serving its own purpose?

Ok, it’s a bad analogy overall as the U.K. simply doesn’t have the same background and tribal divides as Libya.  But with a bit of thought, common ground between the situations could be found.

Operation Northwoods was a 1962 plan by the US Department of Defense to cause acts of violence, blamed on Cuba, in order to generate U.S. public support for military action against the Cuban government. The plan called for various false flag actions, such as staged terrorist attacks and plane hijackings, on U.S. and Cuban soil.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users