In Memory of late Col. Muammar Gaddafi

And so what ?

Of course they didn't want to pay taxes so they staged the war.

 

LOLOL..

The oil business hates a war zone.. Every oilman in the world knows that...

 

Anastasio Somoza García (1896-1956) was a Nicaraguan General, President, and dictator from 1936 to 1956. His administration, while being one of the most corrupt in history and brutal to dissidents, was nevertheless supported by the United States because it was viewed as anti-communist.

Franklin Roosevelt once said of him: “Somoza may be a son-of-a-(*)(*)(*)(*)(*), but he’s our son-of-a-(*)(*)(*)(*)(*),”

 

The US had NOTHING to do with Khadafi's taking power.. Where is your comparison?

 

I guess its time to close the beachs and turn them into rich resorts for the rich. If others get their hands on them.

 

Marlowe, I like you and we agree on certain things, but seriously... you've bought into some serious propaganda.

 

Why don't you look at photos of the Cornishe in Tripoli..

Libya belongs to the Libyans.. always has always will.

 

Free election in the US, can anyone run for the office of president. All the major federal positions are locked down by people with power and money.

 

To be fair, that's true of most countries in general.

The only countries where elections are more open tend to be small in population. For example, running for the top office in Iceland is much easier than doing it here.

 

Are you sure ?
And what in this case US companies do in Irak?

The Iraqi government is to award a series of key oil contracts to British and US companies

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/jun/30/iraq.oil

Oil is important in this war but not the main

. The main is to destabilized the region and to create new Hitler in the face of Islamic fundamentalists against China ( which is threat to US hegemony in the world ) , as before the U.S. helped grow Hitler against the USSR and had a good benefit from the results of this war.

And now the U.S. is going to war with China by islamists .

But Gaddafi was foolish enough to be friends with the Chinese.

You will never be told about it by BBC or CNN but on the Internet this information can be found.

 

It would indeed be unlikely, that as dictator, Gaddafi only did bad things. After all, if he would have done only bad things, he would have found himself dethroned a lot quicker. Gaddafi took care of his tribe, but in return did a lot of bad things to other tribes, or furthered quarrels between tribes to destabilise them and ensure they would not rise as powerblock against him. (Which worked for about 40 years.)

Is there "an overwhelming amount of evidence", I don't think so. Because if there had been, this overwhelming amount of evidence would have been known to the common man worldwide. Still I wouldn't mind seeing the black-on-white-written evidence of it, which is boldly state here as fact.

Gaddafi was, first and foremost, psychologically unstable in a way, that world leaders and diplomats (even the arabian ones - like Nasser) said openly (!) that he was a madman.

Der Spiegel International - Gadhafi's Death: The End of a Tyrant

Wikipedia on Abu Salim prison

Recent discoveries in Libya: BBC: Libyan prison massacre. OR, just google: libya+mass grave+found

His opponents were oppressed. That is not all of the people, but still quite a lot. Were they poor? Well, the average man on the street in Libya on the news doesn't look very rich to me. Nor do the houses. But Gaddafi had golden guns, so I guess there was money thanks to the oil, just not for everyone (i.e. the common man of another tribe).

Got an official source where this is listed? I heard about the free healthcare before.

Any sensible argument is shoved out of the door, when bringing up conspiracies.

I am aware that Gaddafi (after his failed dream of Arabian nationalism), wanted an United Africa. If I am not mistaken, at first under Libyan leadership. So far I know the other african countries weren't too enthusiastic about it. That aside, I never heard of the "fact" that, Gaddafi wanted to be king of Africa and enslave all the people. So I'm not sure why it's addressed as a lie in the first place.

I find it unfair to shove the blame on big companies alone, or the western world for that matter. In the last 50 years since the independence of various African countries, a large factor involved in the failure of Africa has been the leadership of the respective nations. Weak, corrupt leadership, often by madmen, has systematically destroyed whole nations on the African continent. Western and Eastern opportunism is only one part of the problem.

A bit off-topic: A nice book to read about Africa would be



It's fairly neutral, written by an outsider and deals with the major developments throughout the continent. I found it a very good overview of roughly half a century of African politics and it also shows just how much internal and external factors have lead to the problems currently on the continent.

 

The US government is NOT handing out oil contracts out to anyone in Iraq or anywhere else.. and none of the US majors have bid on concessions in Iraq.

The Chinese have 40 billion dollars invested in Africa and get most of their oil from Sudan.. where they have built ports, pipelines, power plants etc.

In Libya they have a small oil facility but mostly they were getting PAID to build a railroad.

Libya is NOT about China.

 

Seres: The Libyans tried to depose Khadafi in 1984.. they failed and a rein of terror ensued..

 

Crack kills kid. Now on with your regularly scheduled load of horser(*)(*)(*)(*) that will get you laughed out of the room by anyone with even a modicum of intelligence.

 

WEST vs CHINA: A NEW COLD WAR BEGINS ON LIBYAN SOIL


The question as to why US-led NATO forces are determined to engineer a regime change in Libya is now becoming clear. While media pundits and political experts still argue over whether the Libyan rebel gangs are actually being backed and directed by US, UK and Israel intelligence agencies, broader long-range Western policy objectives for Libya are being completely ignored.

One only has to read the strategic briefings in U.S. AFRICOM documents to realise the true endgame in Libya: the control of valuable resources and the eviction of China from North Africa.

Then you can read here

http://21stcenturywire.com/2011/04/12/2577/

 

1st I would like to say I don't know of any place the U.S. has an embassy where globalists are truly enemies of the local authorities. We had an embassy in Libya.

2nd, I would like to also see some actual documentation as to the listed benefits, as that would be huge for the war on globalism and central bankers. If you truly do not want him to die in vain, provide proof he was that good to his people.

P.S. -I know all leaders have things that can be used against them, but if he really provided all of that, and Libya was a happy pretty place like in that video, not only does it make western leaders look worthless, but actual proof should be easy to come up with.

 

Ya because it had absolutely nothing to do with the western backed economic boycott and embargo. Good god just goes to show there are idiots who will believe anything they read on the internet no matter how ridiculous the claim.

 

WHY WE ARE IN LIBYA: a revealing interview with Dr Paul Craig Roberts

http://21stcenturywire.com/2011/04/12/2577/

 

THE NEW COLD WAR WITH CHINA

What the Chinese economic data (above) does show clearly is that the strategic policy objectives outlined in Washington’s AFRICOM documents, particularly those ones designed to confront and minimise China’s economic interest in Africa- are working very well as a result of instability in the region. ’Destabilisation’ as a tool of control has always worked for colonial powers. Engineered chaos can then be managed by a strong military presence in the region.

In effect, what we are witnessing here is the dawn of a New Cold War between the US-EURO powers and China. This new cold war will feature many of the same elements of the long and protracted US-USSR face-off we saw in the second half of the 20th century. It will take place off shore, in places like Africa, South America, Central Asia and through old flashpoints like Korea and the Middle East.

http://21stcenturywire.com/2011/04/12/2577/

 

Um..western elites weren't paying for the USSR's military build up. They are paying for China's. If we do go to war, free traders will be hung from every light post on our way to the docks to board the ships.

 

LOLOLOL.. Libya doesn't have enough oil to make it worth their while.. You are linked to one of those NWO kooksites.

We didn't engineer regime change in Libya.. If the Arab Spring hadn't come along the status quo would have sufficed.

Its one of those things.. if it ain't broke don't fix it.. To many6 US conpnies were already there and working in Libya.

 

Oh this explains why you're so anti-Gaddafi then, just because he tried to have your beloved king Abdullah assasinated lol

 

Actually I was in Libya in 1969 so I have followed Khadafi's insantiy for 42 years.

Libya has survived a 42 year nightmare... Khadafi held Libya back.. Khadafi was so insecure and had such a chip on his sholder that there is NO WAY he could have evolved into a stateman who's main interest was the progress and progress of the Libyan people..

Libya for the past 40 years has been all about Khadafi.

 

Sure. That's what starts discussion .

btw - evert sides got their own agenda + "propaganda " . IMO its healthy to challenge/question/ look for something other than , main stream crap , dont you think so ?

cheers.

btw - OP was written by someone called D-A .- Devil's Advocate. ? IMO Nevertheless , he made some valid points. (wink)

 

You'd be shocked (or perhaps not ) to , in due time learn , how manyb idiots believed - whatever mainstream media told them .

As they say - Every little helped . vut if you recall Sth Africa''s racist Apartheid , regime successfully found many methods of circumventing so-called Western economic biycott" most of which was merely eye-wash.

,,,