In Memory of late Col. Muammar Gaddafi

Of course the western media.. particularly the US media is completely unfree and controlled.

I would highly doubt that Gadaffi was more evil than Blair, Bush or Obama.

 

Do you agree that the West, particularly in recent decades the US... is a much greater force for evil than any of these tinpot nobody dictators?

The US pick and choose when they wish to support or oppose dictators.

The US media is so deeply controlled and feeding the American public lies and propaganda... how could you possibly know the truth about ANYTHING?

 

So you have proof, evidence, indications or even rumours of how this might have happened, because after seeing the events in Egypt it was weeks after the Libyans started fighting against Gaddafi before NATO started air operations at the request of the rebels who were being slaughtered by Gaddafi forces????

Or is it just you posting a wet dream you had recently...

 

Basically, the battle between the Kool-Aid drinkers and the scepticals.
The pre-Government controlled media produced different information than the new media on Libya. I go along with the unbiased version.

 

This is no time to analyze in detail the "Muslim socialism," which took the real form in Libya. Let's only note that revenues from oil exports were directed to the needs of all people, making it possible to provide an unprecedented high for Africa living standard. Only this one fact says a lot about the personality of the Libyans leader.

Was there socialism in Libya, and "with what face" - it's a topic for academic discussions.But, without a doubt, the Jamahiriya was one of the few countries where were elements of the real self-government, where they were provided social benefits such as free health care and education (including higher education), worthy habitation, retirement, etc.Do not forget that Libya has successfully fought against drugs and terrorism,that is what so called "free world" cannot show off.

But the main thing is that we all have seen how a small state alone battled against world imperialism.In fact, for these seven months, the Libyans heroically resisted the united global capital. And at the head of this resistance was Muammar Gaddafi.

 

Yes, we were all witnesses to the vents at that time, with the Arab League imploring NATO to act and no one disagreeing that that was the right thing to do. After the fact, everyone thought it a bad idea

Nato intervened only after the Arab League required such. Europe had already long been doing business with Ghadaffi, there is no reason to think that it would embark on a war in the hopes of doing more/better (?) business with the rebels.

And you would be foolish for saying so. The democratically elected leaders have not been able to rule for 42 years unhindered by any opposition and unaccountable to voters.

So what if the West decides who it wants to support - we all do in our own microcosm and we are free to pick the leader we think most represents our views internationally.
If you reject western press, you are a victim of the propoganda of the other side because there is no objective truth.

We have seen how a mentally ill dictator would call his people who disagree with him rats, who would inist on being the king of a continent and how such a man dies like any other sooner or later.

Global capital whatever that means is no worse than a dictators personal fortune being amassed under brutal repression.

 

A victory of Democracy looks something like this



The city of Sirte after the liberation from the tyranny of Gadhafi.

The Libyans can be happy now.

 

none of that means anything if you have wahabis in control

tourists are not interested in lying on beautiful beaches with the religious police beating their heads in

that's why Saudi is not known for tourism

 

Mr Sarkozys missile deals with Libyans who didn't want NATO saving civilians in their country.

 

Such information will no doubt be released to general public in some future when it no longer matters and our minds are focused on some other matter.


(wink)

 

Gaddafi would still be in power, if he ruled over one of the many, poorer African nations which do not have the Mediterranean on their borders.

He was an easy target for the NATO, a NATO whom shows us they and the ruling politicians of NATO states, that politics in the west need to change, because we're still on the warpath which has never ended since the start of the cold war, with the U.S banging the biggest drums, and those political leaders of nations who benefit from war banging drums behind it.

We're destined for war, and economic instability and threat of nuclear war, if we as peoples of the West allow our nations to continue smashing the drums of war, with agendas to reinforce their personal standing amongst the Globalist elite.

 

Doc . Pls stop your foolishness, + flaunting yr ignorance - , you're wrong : - could be that you get all yr info from Fox news .



Mandela shrugged off criticisms within South Africa and internationally, particularly from the United States, when he reached out to Gaddafi. He had this to say to his critics:

“Those who say I should not be here are without morals. This man helped us at a time when we were all alone, when those who say we should not come here were helping the enemy.” Clearly, Mandela’s support of Gaddafi is linked to Gaddafi’s support for the ANC during the Apartheid era.

Mandela was the first award winner of the Al Gaddafi International Prize for Human Rights in 1989, an annual prize founded by Gaddafi himself (Other recipients include Lous Farrakhan, Cuba’s Fidel Castro, Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez, and Turkey’s Erdogan). Mandela returned the gesture by bestowing one of South Africa’s highest honours, the Order of Good Hope, on Gaddafi in 1997.

http://woyingi.wordpress.com/2011/02/23/gaddafi-mandela-african-mercenaries/
---

most western govts -incl. Washington had for many years turned a blind eye to conditions in Sth Africa. It was the LEFT - the Socialists. Commies , who initiated + pressured western govt.s.
America continued its support for the Apartheid regime throughout the Namibia guerilla conflict - Unita - in which Che Guevara also played a key role. It was America's fear of communists influence in Africa , which finally forced them to ditch their support for Sth Africa's racist regime and reluctantly join Socialists in suspending South Africa's UN membership long after Sth Africa was kicked out of the (British ) Commonwealth
----

extract from wiki :

UN motion was passed in 1974 to eject South Africa from the UN, but this was discarded by France, Britain and the United States of America, all of them key trade associates of South Africa.---

----

FYI - I was still at Tech College when I joined one of the earliest student's Anti-Aparthied protests in Trafalgar Square listening to speeches by ANC leaders like Albert Luthuli , Walter Sisulu etc.


....

 

No the Western media particularly the U.S. is free and uncontrolled, we have a private and free press, read the first amendment sometime sport.

 

Not one little bit.

Really? Which government agency is in control of the U.S. media and what it reports or how it reports it? Complete and other bull(*)(*)(*)(*).

 

The "Wahhabis" must be in control of all Egypt..

 

Poppycock .

Freedom of the press belongs to the man who owns one." A. J. L.


He who owns the media, controls the media. With such powerful platforms they are able to drown out independent media and control public opinion and government policy. There can be no freedom without freedom of the press and there can be no freedom of the press if only a few powerful corporations are allowed to own it.

(think Rupert Murdoch etc.)

The Media owners choose what you will see on the nightly news and trick you into believing it is unbiased reporting. As we see below all the major news outlets, regardless of what they make you believe, contributed heavily to George W. Bush in both 2000 and 2004 so any argument that they are controlled by liberals evaporates. In this case they all supported the candidate that promised to allow consolidation of multiple media companies.

The very news stories that you are fed by the mainstream media are manipulated to mirror the public relations campaigns of companies that operate nuclear plants, sprawling theme parks that gobble up wetlands, defense contractors, oil companies, etc....

Remember the old "Outer Limits" TV shows where the announcer says "We control everything you see and hear, the vertical, the horizontal," etc? The corporate controlled news media controls all you see and hear.

cheers....

 

Not Sharm el Sheikh surely , my son + d-in-law , is over there now.

 

Well Abu seems to think that the Wahhabi control both Egypt and Libya..

 

The only real plus I can see to Gaddafi is that he kept Libya from becoming a theocracy.

There are signs now that this may happen (and may happen in Egypt as well).

 

How did he prevent Libya from becoming a theocracy? He changed the laws at a whim and that would tend to increase more rigid forms of religion. Call it blowback.

I would encourage you to read the Libyan Constitution .. especially the Premble and Rights of the People , article 11.

 

Unfortunately, having a free press doesn't require having a press that is objective and supportive of public interests.

All it requires is a lack of government control. Our media is at least free in that respect, which is more than I can say for most of the Islamic World.

 

Well, I was looking at it more from the perspective that he wasn't very religious himself. He didn't adhere to a strict interpretation of Islam.

 

I don't think he was religious at all.. and I don't think religion drives Libya in general.

I really don't expect radical Islam to be a factor in Libya.

 

I hope you're right.

 

I hope you're wrong- if only to wreck NATO's oil grab.