PDA

View Full Version : Yes, I’m saying that it’s all lies



osoab
14th September 2011, 04:29 PM
Very Good read. We have covered some of the material on the forum.

The author is from Iceland.

The site takes forever to load due to all the pics and stuff.

I am only posting the first three chapters. The last two are about as big as the first three combined.






Yes, I’m saying that it’s all lies (http://gagnauga.is/index.php?Fl=Greinar&ID=169)
01.09.2011

Deila (http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.gagnauga.is%2Findex. php%3FFl%3DGreinar%26ID%3D169&src=sp) http://gagnauga.is/myndir/greinar/Gaddafi-supporters.jpgYes. You heard what I said. All of it. It's all a bunch of lies. I know that it is a shocking claim to many, that our trusted officials in concert with our reliable mass media actually participated in deliberate deception designed to get us to accept war, but deal with it. I'm making it.

Our biggest moral obligation is ensuring that wars are not waged against people under false pretenses. War is the most disgusting and horrible thing you can inflict on any person.

As you read this article I am sure you will find there are a number of things that will surprise you. After researching the situation for months I assure you I have investigated as many sides of the story as possible. But I did reach a clear conclusion and I will not shy away from openly expressing the views that I have formed during this process.


What we have been seeing recently in the media, this time with a special emphasis on the online community, is the most sophisticated propaganda firework display we have ever witnessed. It’s no surprise so many people have been duped.
But a lie can travel the world before the truth has tied it’s shoe laces. But I believe that once the laces have been tied and the truth starts walking, eventually it’s gonna get to people.

There are at least two sides to every story


None of us could possibly have avoided hearing NATO’s side of the story and the reasons and justifications given for Gaddafi’s removal and how military intervention is necessary to protect Libyan citizens.


But are you sure you’ve heard both sides? Have you heard Gaddafi’s perspective on this issue? Or have you just heard “his side” as represented by the mainstream western media? If so I can start by telling you that his words, and the words of his son, Saif Al-Islam Gaddafi have been deliberately misinterpreted and edited out of context to create simple soundbite propaganda to influence people.


You will find that there is a completely different side of this story that is being completely ignored. It is not even being debated for it's merits, it simply is not talked about at all in the mainstream media.


Think about it. How much do you really know about Libya? Did you in all honesty know anything about the country before these events started unfolding? If I would have asked you back in February 10 questions about Libya and it’s affairs, how many do you think you would have answered correctly? And how much do you honestly know about what is going on there now?


I often find it intriguing how people tend to think they are qualified to give their view on things that in reality they know next to nothing about. They might have vague ideas generated by the mainstream media, biased textbooks and general pre-conceived notions, but not an actual thorough understanding of the country and it’s people and customs.


I had a discussion with a guy at a local bar the other day and I began the conversation by asking if he could tell me on what continent Libya was. Neither he nor his friend could answer correctly, picking Europe and Asia as their educated guesses. For some reason this guy still felt that his take on the situation was more accurate than mine, even as I told him I had been spending weeks investigating the matter. For those of you confused the correct answer is Africa.


I want to ask a simple question to make a simple case? Can you name me one current Libyan government official? You’re not allowed to say Gaddafi. Who holds the position of “Secretary of the General People’s Assembly” a position comparable to that of prime minister, although with a slightly different emphasis as he does not represent a political party and does not alone hold significant power. Did you even know that such a position exists in Libya and that he is elected by the people?


The less you know about something, the easier it is to deceive you.

My intention for exposing your potential and likely ignorance on this subject is not an attempt to show that I’m smarter or better than you. As I found out myself researching this article I knew remarkably little about Libya. And that is my point.


The mainstream media is focusing entirely on a set of news stories that have the specific intention of gathering support for military action and actively suppressing any story that would lead to people opposing it. This pattern will be exposed clearly as this article progresses.


It’s no wonder we don’t know much about Libya. Of course it gets confusing with all the different stories we hear of dictators and tyrants oversees. It is difficult to be an expert on all nations in the world. Just consider how many nations have existed and how long and rich each of their history is and how complex and unique the situation in each country is today.


When this is combined with a relentless, precise and extremely well organized propaganda blitz against one nation that is being targeted by an army, it’s all too easy to tag along.


I would also like to add that this article has proven difficult and this is the third version of it. Well actually it's the fourth considering that this translation is updated from the third, final Icelandic version. Yet it is of vital importance to me that it is as comprehensive and convincing as possible, because the more I wrote and the more I researched, the more clear the magnitude and the scale of this massive deception campaign became. Most people, unfortunately have not developed the type of immunity to this kind of propaganda and are simply put, still to gullible in the face of such force.


I am not going to be answering comments about me being arrogant or one sided or any other remarks unrelated to the specific points I raise in this article. My only goal is to speak truly and freely how I feel about this after my research and you are welcome to make of it whatever you want.
I will not pretend to be neutral when it comes to the deliberate killings of innocent civilians and the attempted destruction of a great, unique nation whose people want nothing but peace and independence.


"If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor. If an elephant has its foot on the tail of a mouse and you say that you are neutral, the mouse will not appreciate your neutrality.


- Bishop Desmond Tutu



My goal is obviously not to achieve popularity or attention as Gaddafi is certainly not the most popular man in the world right now. Thanks to the media mind manipulation machines most now see him as a crazed dictator who kills peaceful protesters, schedules mass rapes and supports terrorism. And I’m taking "his side" ? Good luck me…


If the only thing I achieve with this article is to show that there is such a thing as Gaddafi's side and that it has been blacked out by the media, then it will have been worth it. As that should be of deep concern to us all.


Ultimately of course, the question is not about Gaddafi. This is what the propaganda machines manage to do so successfully. With their Hollywood formula they create the image of a bad guy that has to be stopped by the good guy and all other sides of the arguments can be ignored as long as that is perceived to be the case.


But don’t think for one second I will just sit by as this next blockbuster bloodbath unfolds and not do my best to expose it for what it is.


Unfortunately this is not a subject that can be covered in the fast food style of the gossip, profit driven mainstream media garbage. I do not take their example in aiming my writings at the lowest common denominator, rather I am trying to appeal to those who are genuinely interested in researching this topic with the goal of understanding it. There is simply put far too much that needs to be addressed and I assure you, every word is there for a reason. Except for these five words.



I sometimes get comments that my articles are too long and that no one will bother to read them. It reminds me of a story I heard of Bob Dylan. This slick record executive came to the studio after hearing an album, and said “ I love this song, but you need to make a short version so we can get it played on the radio. “This is the short version” Dylan replied and I would say the same.


Don’t be so naive as to think you can be knowledgable about a subject after reading a few mass produced news stubs.



I would also like to point out that if you think this article is long, just think how long it took me to write it. I promise you, I am saving you a lot of trouble. What took me months to research, you can read in a few hours. And for that I am getting no money from anyone. I don’t do it for fun either as I know of many more fun ways to spend my time than browsing through pictures and watching videos about war and death.


I do this solely out of responsibility for my own conscience. And even after this article and all the research I did, I still have questions.

You don’t need to finish the entire article now, it will be here, but I highly recommend finishing it eventually.

I will provide links and sources as we go and I encourage anyone to challenge their contents, or the arguments I make. Let’s hope I’m not wrong after all the work I’ve put into this.


Now, some of you won’t need to read any article to know that the war on Libya is based on lies. You just know by experience not to trust the mainstream media and to know that the military powers NEVER take on such a mission for simple humanitarian reasons. They know that all such rhetoric by those in power is empty and meaningless and only meant to camouflage other reasons that include geo-political strategy, resources and control.


If you are one of those people I still recommend that you continue reading, I am positive you will understand more thoroughly the nature and scale of this particular deception, in this particular war.


My goal in this article is to deconstruct every single argument and justification being made for the bombing and potential ground invasion of Libya. It is divided in these 6 chapters:


1st chapter: Gaddafi is an evil dictator
2nd chapter: Human Rights violations in Libya
3rd chapter: We must protect peaceful protesters
4th chapter: LIES LIES LIES
5th chapter: History of Libya
6th chapter: Motives




1st chapter: Gaddafi is an evil dictator

http://www.cartoonmovement.com/depot/cartoons/2011/03/Dugy3lFnRRWk-DAL1_DwaQ.jpeg


Pick any mainstream news story about Libya and this will be stated as given. He is one of those corrupt third world dictators, of course he is! He’s been in power for far too long! But wait a minute…

It is not even officially acknowledged that this claim is being heavily disputed. What is also not being reported is an even more stunning fact, not only is he not an evil dictator, he is not even a dictator at all.


He holds no official power. I think I am going to repeat this cause it is staggering how loud this has been screamed while being completely ignored:


LISTEN CLOSELY! GADDAFI HAS NO OFFICIAL AUTHORITY IN LIBYA


If this statement is true you will immediately notice that all the talk you have heard about “removing him from power” is just a farce.


In fact, Gaddafi has only an honorary title as “the father of the revolution” and is also dubbed “the leader of the revolution” hence the common reference to him as leader of Libya. He has influence, as anyone with such a status and reverence in a country would have. But by no technical or logical definition can he be described as a dictator.


A dictator is someone who has the official authority to make all decisions facing a country. He has final and official authority over the army, laws and courts. Plenty of such figures exist. Gaddafi has no such authority so how can anyone claim he is a dictator? That can only be considered a conspiracy theory.


In the few instances this has been addressed it is claimed that despite this “everyone knows” that he is really in charge. Of course. But when I say a powerful group of bankers is really in charge of the US government you call me crazy. Maybe “everyone” doesn’t know that yet, but I have a feeling it won’t be long.


So who is in power in Libya, if not Gaddafi? This is where things start to get interesting.

We have to bring democracy to Libya!


Oh really? What kind of democracy? Representative democracy such as the one currently being employed in most western countries? A two party system such as the one in the US?

People in Iceland have been talking a lot lately about democratic reforms. What these discussions usually revolve around is more emphasis on people’s participation, more national voting and big matters being discussed in big meetings.


Direct democracy is very similar to the system we used in Iceland during our founding years. Almost exactly the same. The idea is basically this, get people together in conference halls open to discuss specific issues relating to neighbourhoods and vote on them. Choose representatives to go a more centralized meeting to discuss matters relating to larger areas and then finally do this for the entire country. This is the general idea and it seems pretty simple.

But oh yes, excuse me, I was supposed to be talking about the dictatorship in Libya but just started rambling on about democratic reforms in Iceland.


No, in fact I just trolled you, I am talking about Libya. Direct democracy has been employed in Libya ever since when Gaddafi relinquished all official power and resigned to the symbolic position he has today in 1977. Let me repeat this fact that is also being completely ignored by the mainstream media.

ATTENTION! LIBYA HAS A FUNCTIONING DIRECT DEMOCRACY

Or at least they did until the western powers started their “operations”.

Do you understand what I am saying? That despite how many times you have heard Gaddafi being referred to as a dictator, it is still false? Either because someone is lying to you or have themselves been lied too?

In this Orwellian world we find ourselves in it is actually quite difficult to find reliable information concerning this, especially from the mainstream media who some people still, unfortunately see as the official certifiers of truth.

But do not despair. Valiant internet knights have managed to dig up excellent footage that completely contradicts the narrative being currently fed to us.

One of the best information regarding this whole situation is in fact, just an amateur video put together by a random youtube user that had about a 100 views when I discovered it.


I always think it’s a bit funny when people try to discredit certain types of information by alluding to it being “something you picked up from the internet’” while simultaneously hailing the internet as one of the most wonderful technological achievements of history.


These people have seen stupid videos online, we all have. They conclude that since you believe something that to them seems so far fetched, it must mean you’ve watched one of those videos and fell for it without researching it using “solid sources”.


A lot of people also seem to think that we "can't" know what's really going on, since you can't trust any of the media. Well, we can and should trust ourselves in piecing together the information available and draw an informed conclusion, or at least educated assumptions.


Meanwhile this trust that the large media networks have as the only “solid sources” is being systematically abused to favour the military and Wall Street.


And the fact is that the internet invites anyone to become an independent journalist.


You can record your own material or edit together relevant clips from different sources to make extremely interesting and informative videos.


Often these videos will include small bits from these so called “solid sources” that have revealed discrepancies in the official line and put them into proper context.


This video I am posting is a prime example of that and includes extremely relevant information relating to Libya’s democratic system.


Please take a quick break from reading to watch these videos. If you have any genuine interest in knowing the truth and are sincere in your respect for justice you will watch them. Trust me, it’s worth it.






2000 Conference Halls



http://changeobserver.designobserver.com/media/images/ConferenceHallTripoli_525.jpg



What you are now looking at is a conference hall that was designed to be built but has been put on hold after these recent events. Since the Libyan Revolution of 1969, 2000 conference halls have been built in which people come together to decide local policies and appoint people’s commission to implement these policies.

The secretary general of state in Libya is Baghad Mahmudi. I think if you would make a wager of 100$ with everyone living in the west about who that guy is you would become very rich.

I’m not saying this to pretend to be smarter than you, like you I did not know who he was until I started researching for this article. My point is we should not engage in the bombing of a country which we have so little real knowledge about! Have you been to Libya? Well neither have I, so shouldn’t you at least look into it in detail before we just barge in their with military aircraft and start killing people?

Consider that if the fact holds that Gaddafi has no official power in Libya beyond a regular citizen and some honorary treatments, all the arguments for the bombings and support of rebel groups have collapsed, as the whole operation is based on aiding a popular revolution to topple Gaddafi and “remove him from power” So what power"?

Could it be that we live in such a crazy world. Yes, in fact it very well could be.


Here we see Moussa Ibrahim, spokesman of the Libyan government saying that Obama is delusional.




And take for instance this example, a little gem that passed through the propaganda filters.

This Washington Post reporter tries to put what he is hearing in context with what his programmed reality can come up with and the only thing he can conjure up is that all these supporters of Gaddafi he met in Libya must just be this crazy.



The headline is "Many Libyans appear to back Gaddafi (http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/crisis-in-the-mideast/2010/08/25/ABHShlRB_story.html)"


(To enter the world of the Gaddafi believers is to enter an “Alice in Wonderland” realm in which the regime’s supporters are the real revolutionaries, not the rebels seeking to topple the government, because Libya is in a state of perpetual revolution.


The Libyan people can’t overthrow their government because they are the government, in accordance with the country’s definition of itself as the Great Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, which loosely translates as “state of the masses.”Gadhafi can't be toppled because he holds no formal position; he is the Brother Leader, a guide and a mentor, a patriarch and an uncle who advises his people but does not rule them.)


I hope you still have appetite. There is a lot more to come.

osoab
14th September 2011, 04:35 PM
2nd Chapter - Human Rights abuses in Libya


This is a mantra that is easy for the propaganda machines to preach. Once again reality seems to be quite different.


First question you might ask yourself, if Gaddafi is such a gross human rights violator, why was Libya elected by other African Nations to lead the Human Rights Council of the United Nations in 2003?


Source BBC (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/2672029.stm)


First of all, if Gaddafi has no power in Libya accusing “his men” of human rights violation simply doesn’t fly. Unless he just has his private secret mafia? But that would also be just a conspiracy theory. (Do not get me wrong, a lot of conspiracy theories have basis for them, but I have seen no evidence for this one)


Wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Rights_Watch) on Human Rights Watch
Another (http://politinfo.wordpress.com/2009/07/16/human-rights-watch-biased-corrupt-and-in-denial/)article dealing with it's corrupt nature


Most, if not all of the accusations being presented to us by the media come from one organization "Human Rights Watch" an American based organization that receives most of it's funding from George Soros, a well known banking mogul and leading globalist. It is not an unbiased organization at all, yet the media will always report it as a "human rights organization" as if it is an authority on this subject.




"According to a 2008 financial assessment, HRW reports that it does not accept any direct or indirect funding from governments and is financed through contributions from private individuals and foundations.[9] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Rights_Watch#cite_note-Financials-8) According to NGO Monitor (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NGO_Monitor) this policy is violated by support from the Dutch government (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_government) and a May 2009 fund raising trip to Saudi Arabia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saudi_Arabia).[10] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Rights_Watch#cite_note-Sponsors-9)
Notably, billionaire (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Billionaire) financier and philanthropist George Soros (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Soros) announced in 2010 his intention to donate US$100 million to HRW over a period of ten years. He said, "Human Rights Watch is one of the most effective organizations I support. Human rights underpin our greatest aspirations: they're at the heart of open societies."[11] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Rights_Watch#cite_note-10)[12] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Rights_Watch#cite_note-WashingtonPost2010-09-11) The donation increases Human Rights Watch's operating budget from $48 million to $80 million. The donation was the largest in the organization's history"


So, George Soros, who likes to manipulate the economies of entire nations for personal gain (including Iceland and Greece) is their biggest supporters and they go to SAUDI ARABIA on a fund raising trip??


Yes, one of the biggest violators of human rights in the history of mankind financed this human rights organization.


Just because a human rights organization makes an accusation against someone doesn't make it true. Anyone that has the money could form an organization and name it "human rights watch", especially if he intended to use it for this purpose.

There is one substantiated allegation, and that is that in Libya, people have been executed people for terrorism and high treason. This is not something I agree with personally. But then again, I have not been living under constant attacks by secret agents and subversive groups funded by western intelligence agencies trying to undermine a people's revolution.


I have not had multiple attempts on my life and NATO hasn't killed my daughter. I'm sure after a while your sense of humor for people trying to kill you, your people and the leader of your people's revolution, would go away. In any case this is no excuse for the US to bomb anyone as they execute about 44 people a year, many of whom are later proven to have been innocent of their charges.


It is possible that Libya would be the greatest welfare paradise on the planet were it not for the constant interference by greedy western companies. There appear to be few places on earth that have a welfare system as good and where every person is as valued. I kid you not.


Consider Iceland for example. In Iceland we are ruled by a wealthy minority that lives in luxury while many of us work day after day, weekend after weekend, just to be fed and get to live in a home.


In Libya, everyone is entitled to a home, food, water, a vehicle and the opportunity to pursue his interests. If you want education abroad, the government pays for it completely. Need to buy a home to start a family? The government gives you 64.000$ to buy one when you get married.


As with other stuff relating to Libya at the moment it is not that easy to find reliable information regarding this from mainstream sources, but with a little internet detective work you can verify this quite clearly.

From Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Libya_under_Gaddafi#Petroleum_politics) : During the 1970s, the government succeeded in making major improvements in the general welfare of its citizens. By the 1980s Libyans enjoyed much improved housing and education, comprehensive social welfare services, and general standards of health that were among the highest in Africa.'

So… let me get this straight… this evil dictator takes over and stars improving everyones lifestyle! What a monster!


Another thing I did researching this was to watch old mainstream documentaries about Libya, it is informative to see how these films contradict the picture being painted now:





This one is incredibly boring but it gives some insight into the life in Libya:





Consider this video that went viral recently. Gaddafi is writing in a motorcade without any protection and everywhere he goes people meet him in celebration.






Does it now seem to you, just a little bit less of a sign of his “insanity” when he claimed that his people loved him?


I think it’s time you watched this video, with a message from Gaddafi, broadcast over Tripoli on July 1st.





This is a support march for Muammar Gaddafi and it includes 1.7 million people Source. (http://www.mathaba.net/news/?x=627456) There are 2 million people living in Tripoli! And only 6.5 million in the entire Libya! Seems that only those who called in sick that day didn’t make it. Just watch it, and tell me we are witnessing a “popular revolution against Gaddafi in Libya”


One commented that people in North Korea also loved Kim Jong Il. This comparison is preposterous. First of all people are allowed to freely exit Libya as they please. Second of all, that person is admitting that he is loved by his own people and hence that all the talk about him oppressing his own people is utter garbage. Why don’t they just say that then? Why doesn’t Obama admit that, yeah… the people love him, but they’re all batshit crazy…

So… let me get this straight… We’re actually at that point now? We will bomb a country to kill people, to help them get rid of a “dictator” that they all appear to love, but we, sitting on our arrogant asses in front of the TV claim we know better about what is best to them! To the point that we’re willing to kill them to prove that we are right?


How is that not batshit insane??


If you’re thinking it must have gotten worse since you would be wrong.


Here is the Human Development Report of the United Nations, notice that Libya is the only African nation that reaches the green color.


This picture is from 2010.


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5d/UN_Human_Development_Report_2010_1.PNG/800px-UN_Human_Development_Report_2010_1.PNG
Still in doubt? Then I suggest you also read this (http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/docs/16session/A-HRC-16-15.pdf) report from the United Nations in 2011 (for those not paying attention, it’s this year)


It reads like a valedictorian report card.


5. During the interactive dialogue, statements were made by 46 delegations. A number
of delegations commended the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya for the preparation and presentation
of its national report, noting the broad consultation process with stakeholders in the
preparation phase. Several delegations also noted with appreciation the country’s
commitment to upholding human rights on the ground. Additional statements, which could
not be delivered during the interactive dialogue owing to time constraints, will be posted on
the extranet of the universal periodic review when available.

Here are some figures that have been circulating the internet, although I have not been able to find them posted on any of the “solid sources” from the documentaries I have seen and testimony I’ve heard it appears fairly accurate.


Unemployment benefits - 730 U.S. dollars a month.

Nurse salary - $ 1000 per month.

Each baby receives a single gift from the Libyan State - $ 7,000.

The couple receives money from the Libyan government of $ 64,000 to buy a house.(Wedding gift)

State support for a one-off starting their own business - 20,000 U.S. dollars.

High taxes and any fees to forbidden M. Gaddafi initiative.

Education and health care - free of charge.

Education and training abroad is fully payed by Libyan government

Residents receive electricity for free.

Teacher's salary - $ 3,000 per month.

When buying a new car government pays half price.

Brokering real estate is prohibited. Available only direct buyer - seller relationship


Here (http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20110401093127AAUlmw9) we see an inquiry about this on Yahoo Answers


Here (http://danielnouri.org/notes/2011/03/02/libya-is-different/) is a related topic.


Here (http://www.aplaceinthesun.com/news/feature/tabid/131/EntryId/237/Government-to-build-thousands-of-new-homes-in-Libya.aspx) we also see how the Libyan government funds projects that actually benefit the population instead of just powerful corporations. "Government to build thousands of new homes in Libya"

Here (http://www.news24.com/Africa/News/Gaddafi-gives-weapons-to-civilians-20110428) is something that might make you ask yourself another question. If Gaddafi is so hated by his own people, why would the Libyan government pass out weapons to the population to protect people from the rebels and the possible invading armies? Wouldn’t that be suicidal for a dictator trying desperately to retain his power against a popular uprising?


Then the question has to be asked, why does he have so much support from his people and why is the media and our political leaders trying to convince us the opposite?


Here is Serbian journalist Miroslav Lazanski on the issue, corroberating some of these findings:













But then you might start havind second thoughts, thinking… if everything is so good in Libya, what are all these people doing protesting? Are they just wrong?


Here is where the propaganda gets serious. In order to sell you this war, the perception of a massive popular rebellion had to be manipulated into the public mind.

But it is however a valid question, why are these people protesting? And who are they?


Let's look at these questions and find out how convincing the case for a popular rebellion in Libya against Gaddafi is.

osoab
14th September 2011, 04:40 PM
3rd chapter - We must protect the peaceful demonstrators

This is the ultimate firecracker...


Hey, I've got a joke for you, How do you get all the protesters to shut up while you're waging a war? You convince them you're going to war to protect peaceful protesters!


HAHAHAHAHALOLDERP!! Or... wait a second... Maybe it really isn't that funny...


Let's look at this in more detail.


In the start it was a peaceful protest, but after Gaddafi started brutalizing the peaceful demonstrators it turned violent, right?


Weird, cause not even the intentionally biased wikipedia article actually supports that conclusion:


Here is there timeline. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_2011_Libyan_civil_war_before_milit ary_intervention)


So let us see, early phase, 15. february, first day:


15 February




In the evening approximately 200 people began demonstrating in front of the police headquarters in Benghazi following the arrest of human-rights activist Fathi Terbil (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fathi_Terbil).[5] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_2011_Libyan_civil_war#cite_note-4) They were joined by others later who totaled between 500 to 600 protesters. The protest was broken up violently by police,[6] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_2011_Libyan_civil_war#cite_note-aljaz_libya_erupts15Feb-5) causing as many as forty injuries among the protesters.[7] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_2011_Libyan_civil_war#cite_note-15_Feb_BEN-6)



In Al Bayda (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_Bayda,_Libya) and Az Zintan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Az_Zintan), hundreds of protesters called for "the end of the regime" and set fire to police and security buildings.[6] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_2011_Libyan_civil_war#cite_note-aljaz_libya_erupts15Feb-5) In Az Zintan, the protesters set up tents in the town centre.[6] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_2011_Libyan_civil_war#cite_note-aljaz_libya_erupts15Feb-5)



Am I getting this straight? In a country of six and a half million, 200 people showed up to protest?


My response to that would have to be...




Furthermore, on the first day of the protest, about 500-600 people go around Benghazi and start setting police stations and security buildings on fire?? And these are the supposedly peaceful protesters we are supporting?


When Haukur, an Icelandic Human Rights activist was arrested because of a political stunt where he climbed on top of the parliament building and carried the flag of Bonus, a local grocery chain owned by one of Icelands most notorious banker, symbolizing their dynasty's control over congress, about 500-600 Icelanders went and protested at the police station, demanding his release.




The incident escalated to a point where the protesters, broke down the door at the police station and got pepper sprayed by the police. The stand down ensued until allegedly some high ranking official bailed him out, the feeling of victory was nice as you can see in this video:




The response from the media was harsh and many locals acted almost as if this had been a terrorist attack. Are you telling me that if we had actually just burned down the police station, and then gone on to burn down other police stations, that we would have gotten instant military equipment by NATO and support of the international community to get rid of our oppressive government? And the world would praise us as pioneers in a global revolution!


Surely you must be joking


So what have these peaceful demonstrators been up to since their peaceful revolution started? Well, as any group of peaceful demonstrators would, hunting black people! Yes, just listen to this group of immigrant workers who fear for their lives because of the activities of these people. They don't even leave their houses:






Notice how traumatized the man reliving his experience is, a tell that he is not making up the story. Were he to be enthusiastic and dramatic about it, that would be a clear indicator that he was lying. This point becomes more relevant later on.


See here (http://somalilandpress.com/libya-rebels-execute-black-immigrants-while-forces-kidnap-others-20586) this more detailed story on this issue. (Libya: Rebels execute immigrant workers while forces kidnap others)


More on this here (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-08-31/black-libyans-targeted-by-rebels-with-sub-saharan-africans-amnesty-says.html) from Bloomberg
And here (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iblRNeV_KPO4UXlgsIpXDcXMeYyg?docId=b9fdc733d 55e4d5c82d8434904e9233b) from Associated Press
And here (http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle-east/au-libya-rebels-may-be-indiscriminately-killing-black-workers-mistaking-them-for-mercenaries/2011/08/29/gIQAmNRQnJ_story.html) from Washington Post




Here is a very recent and puzzling turn of events. The leader of the rebels in Tripoli has now come out and said that the US tortured him and left him in solidary confinement for 6 years! I suppose that's one way to get militant fighters on your side. Maybe this was the plan all along with Guantanamo? To torture innocent people until you have broken them down and then force them to do your dirty military work? Actually this is something Gaddafi himself seemed to insinuate in the BBC interview you will watch at the end of this article.


Source Yahoo News (http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/envoy/libya-rebel-commander-contends-tortured-rendered-cia-153037850.html)

osoab
14th September 2011, 04:41 PM
3rd chapter cont.



They also seem to be exceptionally good with bureacratic bullshit, as all underground resistance movements are of course...


Since the start of the protest, they've managed to:


Form their own central bank (http://www.cnbc.com/id/42308613/Libyan_Rebels_Form_Their_Own_Central_Bank)


Form a functioning government (http://english.aljazeera.net/news/africa/2011/03/2011322193944862310.html)


Take over oil fields (http://www.businessinsider.com/libya-defections-2011-2#ixzz1Eeo3CI2A)


Anyone that has taken part in any type of protest knows how ridicilously far fetched these ambitions would be to any movement. Sure it would have been cool if we could have just set up our own central bank while demanding the removal of the head of our central bank at the time, David Oddson, but how on earth would we have gone about doing that? Never mind trying that in the US! So what's going on then?


It's seems pretty simple. This is much less a "protest movement" and much rather trained militants backed, armed and financed by the CIA and I would guess Mossad and MI6 as well.


The Libyans that are protesting appear to mostly make up the former upper class of Libya who are pissed off that their power was taken away from them in a popular revolution. Many of these families fled Gaddafi's rule and have had it in for him ever since.


The goal of these clandestine operations was to start enough disturbances, riots and terror events that would be portrayed to people as a revolution of the people through the media.


This has been tried previously in the case of Hugo Chavez in Venezuela, but that attempt failed due to the enormous support he had in his country. (See full documentary from BBC on this case here "The Revolution will not be televised")





Evidence for media manipulation


I don't need to remind you that representatives of all the major media news outlets of the world went to Libya as soon as the protests started, with the intention of covering them. Surely they must have numerous good photos of large peaceful demonstrations against Gaddafi?


Here are some pictures of the protests in Egypt. You can find scores of these kind of pictures with huge crowds, sometimes clashing with police:

http://www.salem-news.com/stimg/january252011/egypt_protest.afp.350.jpghttp://gatewaypundit.rightnetwork.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/egypt-protest-5.jpghttp://4.bp.blogspot.com/_0pgMl1f9mrY/TT87QiL44sI/AAAAAAAAAM0/yMMdBEP8PCg/s1600/Egypt_protest_police.jpg


And even in Iceland, a country with a population of 300.000 we see this turnout:

http://www.rnw.nl/data/files/images/lead/270109%20ijsland%20reykjavik%20proesten%20ANP-8643568_0_0.jpghttp://emergent-culture.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/iceland-protests-fire.jpghttp://www.reuters.com/resources/r/?m=02&d=20090122&t=2&i=7950675&w=460&fh=&fw=&ll=&pl=&r=img-0781dd9c-3965-102c-bb6a-001aa0073023


Well, now let us compare these images, all of which were easily located with a simple google search with some of the images coming from Libya. In Libya I have yet to find a single picture of protesters clashing with police or being barricaded by police. If you can then by all means post it.



http://www.euranet.eu/var/ezwebin_site/storage/images/media/images/english-images/libya-protest2/2766972-1-eng-GB/Libya-protest_teaser.jpg

osoab
14th September 2011, 04:42 PM
3rd chapter cont.


Here we see a definitive flag of the Libyan monarchy now being used by the rebels. Is this even in Libya? Well, anyway, when you see a picture of this flag in a protest, you are looking at anti-gaddafi protests. When you are looking at Gaddafi supporters they will be carrying the green flag. The flag of the Libyan Revolution of 1969.


This is one example of such an event:


http://www.cbc.ca/gfx/images/news/photos/2011/02/19/libya-protest-620-cp-001890.jpg



Well, you might find it curious that this is a picture taken from here (http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2011/02/19/libya-protests-219.html), headlined "84 killed in Libya protests: Rights organization" (Human Rights Watch, of course)


Do these appear to be people protesting Gaddafi? Would protesters of Gaddafi be carrying a glamorous picture of him celebrating? And the flag of his revolution? The answer is clearly no so why are they using this picture? Shouldn't there be plenty of good pictures from the huge protests against Gaddafi?


Actually if you google Libya rebels in the image search you will see a more accurate depiction of this presumed protest movement in Libya. Just try it. (http://www.google.com.mx/search?q=libya+rebels&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&hl=es&tab=wi&biw=1138&bih=525)


http://images.ctv.ca/archives/CTVNews/img2/20110307/800_ap_libya_rebels_110307.jpg
http://publicintelligence.info/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/libya-rebels10.jpg
Waving a peace sign with a machine gun and a machine gun belt wrapped around him. Kumbaja my friend. Kumbaja.
http://resources2.news.com.au/images/2011/03/07/1226016/893142-110307-libyan-rebels.jpg


Surely we should be routing for the gun touting gentlemen over the green flag waving madmen in the picture above.


This is not the only media news outlet to make the same embarrassing mistake:


The Associated Press carried the same picture in this story:


"Libyan Protesters defiant after Gaddafi speech" (http://www.lex18.com/news/libyan-protesters-defiant-after-gadhafi-speech)


And just look at this one, what is this but a bad photoshopped photobomb? They are all celebrating Gaddafi in the background! Either someone actually snuck in to take the picture or it was just added in post production. Either way, it is pure deliberate propaganda!


https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-8jpiAwRNACU/TXH7jzu8xgI/AAAAAAAAFdo/YbuGAv-CACc/Protests%252C+gunfire+hit+Gaddafi+stronghold+a.jpg


This was posted here (http://www.presstv.ir/detail/168254.html), and under it reads "A recent picture of an anti-gaddafi demonstration"


Are you sure mr. reporter that these people wearing the color of his revolution with a glamourous picture of him are anti-Gaddafi? Or is this a bad fake?


And wait a minute... Gadafi.. butcher of libya, didn't I see that movie already...? Oh wait no! That was another guy... Must have been the same producers...


http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41PICeAVVZL._SL500_AA300_.jpg





http://static2.businessinsider.com/image/4d5017734bd7c802571c0000-335-251/libya-protest.jpg



Again, are these anti Gaddafi protesters? This is from a discussion where the poster says he found the picture on google earth. Of course he did. And how was he supposed to know that all these crowds were there to support Gaddafi. That's not what the media had told him.


See here (http://www.noticierodigital.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=10863735&sid=4b26be81ed49689099e6a90bd57282cd)


Again, this picture was posted in at least two places with headlines about protests against Gaddafi:


http://www.saidaonline.com/en/newsgfx/lybia%20protest.jpg

osoab
14th September 2011, 04:43 PM
3rd chapter cont.


From here (http://www.saidaonline.com/en/news.php?go=fullnews&newsid=25311) and here (http://headlinesfortoday.com/us-gives-aid-to-libya-protests-1420.html).


Another one:


http://www.thebusinessage.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/liby_protests_new-300x210.jpg


Taken from here (http://www.thebusinessage.com/2011/02/19/84-killed-in-libya-protests-says-human-rights-watch/)


Here is yet another example. The story is about Gaddafi murdering protesters, when the picture clearly shows his supporters:


Twenty four anti-regime protesters shot dead by security forces (http://www.menas.co.uk/news/article/1497)




http://www.menas.co.uk/images/site/menas_news/photo2/Libay_Benghazi%20protests.jpg

Notice how all the signs are in Arabic. That's also something I've wondered. Why does it seem that all the protesters from pictures of Iran, Syria and Libya have signs in English?


Of course the picture being painted is that they are "pleading to the international community" and surely that's what some of these people are doing. But isn't just a little strange? In the Icelandic protests of 2009, even if we knew the foreign press was watching, very few decided to post their signs in English, most would have just felt that it was silly.


Even though almost everyone in Iceland speaks English and it is not exactly the most common language in Libya.




Some of the most well known pictures might not even be from Libya. Some might just be of gullible westerners who feel they are supporting justice.


http://www.channelnewsasia.com/imagegallery/gallery/php2CMFFc.jpg

https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-ScQMEw3vHsA/TWl3RUD7L4I/AAAAAAAADUc/fSsi37bf-pc/gadaffi+defecate.jpg


http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5060/5459711643_fb9249b0cc.jpg
Oh that's just brilliant. "Hopeless" As opposed to the "Hope" delivered by Obama's presidency. Straight from the Washington propaganda machines anyone? No... get out of town...


http://forevernokia.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/gaddafi-protest.jpg


ALFA


The group American Libya Freedom Assocation or "ALFA" has been the most prominent group to support this rebellion. They have written propaganda articles that make all types of wild accusations against Gaddafi without any proof. Take for example this article that has so many falsehoods in it I almost drowned in them. Of the top of my head it claims, baselessly that Gaddafi implemented Sharia law. In fact, there is now talk of introducing Sharia law in Libya, after the fall of Gaddafi.


Source (http://jonathanturley.org/2011/08/23/proposed-libyan-constituton-would-make-sharia-the-governing-law/)


Unfortunately Wikipedia considers this Associaton a reliable source of information and references is it in some of the accusations it makes.


Libya and the U.S. Qadhafi Unrepentant (http://www.meforum.org/878/libya-and-the-us-qadhafi-unrepentant#_ftn34)


In this propaganda piece you can see their participation verified.


Here we can also see that Mohamed M. Bugaighis, the head of ALFA has connections to the US government.
Voice of Libyan dissent has local ties (http://articles.mcall.com/2011-03-10/news/mc-dc-clinton-dent-libya-20110310_1_moammar-gadhafi-local-ties-libyan-americans)


Here are some more pictures circulating the web that I find suspect.

http://freedomwar.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/Photo0364-2.jpg
One question... What are the flags of Iraq and Palestine doing there? And why is there only one rebel flag and where is located? On top of the Palestinian flag! Why?

The flag of Iraq:

http://flagspot.net/images/i/iq2004.gif
The flag of Palestine:

http://img.alibaba.com/photo/11350693/Palestinian_Flag_Flag_Of_Palestine.jpg


It's worth noting that Gaddafi has been a vocal supporter of Palestine from day 1.


He has been a rock in Israels socks for decades, and the monarchy his revolution overthrew was supported by Israel. Something's not right about this.


Just recently, after the revolution in Egypt, Gaddafi urged Palestinians to rise up against the Israeli occupation in peaceful protests.


"The time for people's revolution has come"

Little did he know that they planned to turn the joke on him.


Here (http://www.nowtheendbegins.com/blog/?p=1947) we see an article that covers this issue, while certainly not in a positive tone.


It should not come as a surprise then that Israel fully supports (http://www.skynews.com.au/world/article.aspx?id=653443&vId=)
the rebels cause. (http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=6612)


Well if the most oppressive, apartheid state in the world supports it it must be ok. A country who murdered peaceful protesters aboard the Mavi Marmara and has systematically robbed Palestinians of their lives and land.

osoab
14th September 2011, 04:44 PM
3rd chapter cont.

But let's move on:

http://ethiopiaforums.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Libya_Protests.jpg


In this picture that has been posted everywhere online, including the mainstream press, there clearly are a lot of people. But why is the only flag visible in the crowd waving right above the camera? Strange, I wonder if it's been planted? No... The technology might be pretty advanced now... but doctoring pictures? Common. That's impossible.


Source (http://www.couriermail.com.au/ipad/libyan-bloodshed-small-price-to-pay/story-fn6ck4a4-1226010086374)
Now here is an oddball:



http://imgs.laprensa.com.ni/2011/02/600x400_1298695351_26-porrtada%20libia2.jpg


Well, the resolution and proportions seem fine... but wait... why is there only ONE FLAG? In the middle of the picture?


https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-KmClbFAfm0I/TWnBEeMRgcI/AAAAAAAAFbU/_9HSNTTEf_g/Libyan%2Bprotesters%2Bat%2BTripoli%252527s%2Bgate% 2Ba.jpg
This one was posted in a few places, including press.tv (http://www.presstv.ir/section/MiddleEastRevolution.html)
Again.. really? One flag? One guy decided to bring his flag?


But wait, here we have a lot of flags!


http://images.ctv.ca/archives/CTVNews/img2/20110402/600_libya_protest_benghazi_ap_110402_16089.jpg?2
.
The only problem with this picture is that it's the same picture as we looked at before and shows the Gaddafi supporters that were being posted as Gaddafi protesters. Except this time, someone went through the trouble of adding red paint on the flags.


While one has to wonder about how amateur the doctoring of these photos is, it also makes you wonder how convincing they could make photos if they actually did their best work.


The most convincing images of masses protesting Gaddafi came after the alleged fall of Gaddafi. This video being among the "best":


This is a screenshot from that very recent BBC report about celebration in Benghazi after allegedly conquering Tripoli.


Here is the image from 01:10
http://i.imgur.com/vuOBB.jpg
And here we have the frame from 02:05http://i.imgur.com/cgxZs.jpg


I have questions about the vanishing flag, the Gaddafi poster with green background next to the demon (subliminal propaganda perhaps?) and why they could only get less than a minute of footage that is looped. Perhaps these can all be explained, and focusing too much on it would amount to speculation that would probably be inadmissable in court. But given the manipulation we've seen so far you can't help but wonder.


In any case these are pictures of Benghazi, the only place where it is recognized that there is opposition to the Green Revolution.


The footage shows celebration after the news about the "fall of Tripoli" which we found out later had not been the fall of Tripoli at all, but was simply a trap set by government forces.


And what has become quite well known in the alternative media now is that the footage allegedly coming from the Green Square in Tripoli did not show a place consistent with the actual Green Square, making it more likely that this is actually filmed in a movie set:


http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/b0c6c62516c9.jpg


Here (http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread744969/pg1) is a full article on this kind of manipulation


And then there is this recent "slip up" at the BBC, showing green square in India as supposedly live from the protests in Libya:




It's almost as if they're doing this on purpose just so they can laugh among themselves at how gullible we are.


The case for a popular uprising being waged against Gaddafi simply seems very thin to me.


Think of it this way, if there was an agenda to make you think there were bigger protests in Libya than there actually were to disguise military operations by CIA funded militant groups to gain control over a country and it's resources, how would they go about doing that?


It's clear that they could do that so that leaves it at, would they. And if we consider that they've done that many times before the answers to that seems clear as well. And if you consider what is at stake in a war like this "it's the least they can do".


Having said that, it is not as if a protest happening in a country is justification for starting a war. If it would be we would have had to bomb every country in the world a long time ago. Where did this notion come from? How many times have there been huge protests in the West?


And what about killing protesters? Well, we'll cover that claim later but what about Kent State Massacre in the US?

osoab
14th September 2011, 04:44 PM
3rd chapter cont.


Kent State Massacre (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kent_State_shootings)


Should the US not have been swiftly invaded? Besides the fact that the case for "Gaddafi's Men" having killed peaceful protesters is very thin. It seems more like people died trying to protect security buildings and police stations and the "protesters" who were killed were armed aggressors.


And EVEN IF, there is a dictator who is believed to oppress his own people, it would only make matter worse to bomb the country! It would not be an excuse!


Do i really have to get into the hipocrisy factor here? How many brutal dictators has the west supported and how many democratically elected leaders have they assassinated? Is this history still unknown to you? And talking about torture! The US officially admits to torture! Have we forgotten about Abu Ghraib already? So you're saying you don't like how Gaddafi is torturing his people so you want the US army to do it instead?


This whole thing is absurd.


What I can unequivocally demonstrate, is that there is not an overwhelming majority protesting Gaddafi. The pictures of his supporters were in general a lot more convincing and crowded. 1.7 million people marched in his support! It's absurd for us to claim that we know better what is in their best interest!


(I refer back to the video above where 1.7 million march in his support, if you did not watch it before, I recommend watching it now)


http://libyarevolt.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/gaddafi-supporters-rally-300x198.jpg
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2011/03/06/article-1363540-0D7E84A4000005DC-1000_634x410.jpg
http://www.abc.net.au/rn/breakfast/galleries/2011/3145009/full/tripoli.jpg
http://www.demotix.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/large_610x456_scaled/photos/594514.jpg
http://thesantosrepublic.com/multimedia/photogallery/2011/07/Gaddafi-supporters.jpg
http://mathaba.net/news/libya/i/2million2011july1mohanned500.jpg
The peaceful protesters?


The West hasn't exactly been hiding it's support for these forces. Here are a few stories worth noting:


Libya Rebel leader had CIA backing (http://abcnews.go.com/International/president-obama-authorizes-covert-libyan-rebels/story?id=13259028) (warning, serious whitewash/propaganda but fact is acknowledged)
Obama authorizes covert support for Libyan Rebels (http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/30/us-libya-usa-order-idUSTRE72T6H220110330)
Libya rebels connection to the CIA by Webster Tarpley (http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article27760.htm)
The world cheers as the CIA plunders Libya into chaos (http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=23474)




Here we can see the rebel army, these are not peaceful protesters. Forget that notion. They are armed to the teeth and they are killing black people and burning down police stations. Are the Libyan people supposed to sit back while that happens? Would you?









Not only a connection to the CIA, but also to Al Qaeda


No I am not making this up. The same people that the Americans are supporting in Libya have also been members of the "Al Qaeda" movement in Iraq.


I can just hear some of you blurting out that it is nothing but a crazy conspiracy theory. But don't call the doctor yet, we have "solid sources"

osoab
14th September 2011, 04:45 PM
end of 3rd chapter.



The Daily Telegraph (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/19/extremists-among-libya-rebels_n_837894.html)


Libyan Rebel Commander admits his fighters have Al Qaeda links
http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/01857/Hasidi_1857433c.jpg




Huffington Post (http://thehill.com/blogs/twitter-room/other-news/150857-michael-moore-rips-obama-over-libya-)


Anti American Extremist among Libyan Rebels U.S. has vowed to protect


You can't dismiss this that easily can you? Straight from the horses mouth! The commander of the rebels admits this and a few media outlets pick up on it before it slips down the rabbit hole.


So, now, is there any picture starting to emerge inside your head at this point?


Or does this all still seem very contradictory and confusing to you?


What if I told you that the most likely explanation in my humble opinion is that the CIA are knowingly funding terrorist activites, that KILL American Soldiers and innocent Iraqi people to justify their continued military presence?


Pretty much exactly like in 1984. Perpetual Warfare. I think it's time for a quote from that book, performed by Michael Moore. He has fortunately remained consistant in his anti war stance, and is against the military aggression in Libya (source) (http://therearenosunglasses.wordpress.com/2010/07/27/the-biggest-secret-that-wikileaks-doesnt-reveal-america-wants-pakistan-to-support-the-taliban/)









It is also worth noting that a lot of the rebels in Afghanistan were funded and armed by the ISI in Pakistan, which has had a close relationship with the CIA for many years and Pakistan has been given military aid from the US all throughout the course of the war. Source (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4725992.stm)


But as this would be enough material for a whole new article I'll just leave it at that. Let's concentrate on Libya for now.


And what about Benghazi?


A little bit of history is needed. Wiki will do for this purpose:


Heavily bombed in World War II (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II), Benghazi was later rebuilt with the country's newly found oil wealth as a gleaming showpiece of modern Libya (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Modern_Libya). It became the capital city of Emirate of Cyrenaica (1949-1951) under Idris Senussi I (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idris_of_Libya). In 1951, Cyrenaica was merged with Tripolitania and Fezzan to form the independent Kingdom of Libya (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Libya), of which both Benghazi and Tripoli were capital cities. Benghazi lost its capital status when the Free Officers under the leadership of Muammar Gaddafi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muammar_Gaddafi) staged a coup d'état in 1969, whereafter all government institutions were concentrated in Tripoli. Even though King Idris was forced into exile and the monarchy abolished, support for the Senussi dynasty remained strong in Cyrenaica. This was emphasized by real or perceived injustices from the government towards the people of Benghazi, including the demolition in the year 2000 of the arena of football (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_football)club Alahly Benghazi S.C. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alahly_Benghazi_S.C.), following anti-government protests.


Whoever these protesters are they are glorifying a brutal monarch that was deposed by a popular revolution. Here is a picture of a young Benghazi carrying a picture of King Idris during the 2011 revolution:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/39/A_Benghazi_citizen_holding_King_Idris%27s_photo.JP G/800px-A_Benghazi_citizen_holding_King_Idris%27s_photo.JP G


While it is clear enough that Gaddafi has overwhelming support in Tripoli and most other parts of the country, Benghazi seems to be the only place were any significant number of people oppose him and the Jamahariya, State of the masses.


Somehow I have a hard time so sympathize with people glorifying a monarch that oppressed the people of an entire nation, just because their city was "it" at the time... Especially when they use means of terrorism to get their point across.


This conversation is just brilliant to listen to. Anyone enthusiastic about debating in general should check it out. Such a pwning has rarely been recorded:




Of course it is possible that people in the Benghazi area have some legitimate grievances that they feel Gaddafi is responsible for. That I simply can not know for certain at this point.


Regardless, this is a reality that is very different from what is being propagated in this blitz media campaign, and does not mean that this minority is entitled to take over a country.


So what have we learned so far?


Fighters with ties to Al Qaeda, sponsored by NATO and the CIA are burning down police stations and security buildings, and when Gaddafi says his people will resist this foreign hostility and attempted occupation he is "declaring war against his own people" What a bunch of fucking bullshit!


And oh sure, we just have to help them by BOMBING their capital!


What would have to happen for you to support your home country being bombed from the air? Historic landmarks, universities and peoples houses were being blown to pieces and people killed?


Libyans do not want these air strikes! It is simply a disgusting lie!

crazychicken
14th September 2011, 05:03 PM
Thanks for the huge efforts getting this info together.

Sure does change the perspective of what's happening over there. For me at least. Hopefully for others.

Media manipulation---I'M SHOCKED

LOL

CC

osoab
14th September 2011, 05:14 PM
Thanks for the huge efforts getting this info together.

Sure does change the perspective of what's happening over there. For me at least. Hopefully for others.

Media manipulation---I'M SHOCKED

LOL

CC

Not my effort other than getting the posts cut down to what can be posted.

There are still 2 more chapters to go after the ones above.

Big props to the Icelander that put all this together.

Santa
14th September 2011, 06:36 PM
Good stuff, osoab.

Libertarian_Guard
14th September 2011, 07:09 PM
In 1935 Butler published War is a Racket, which got high praise at the time, as well as strong criticism. The forward by Lowell Thomas spoke of Butler’s “moral as well as physical courage” and noted that “Even his opponents concede that in his stand on public questions, General Butler has been motivated by the same fiery integrity and loyal patriotism which has distinguished his service in countless Marine campaigns.”

What Butler fought so hard to do was to take the focus off of moral and ideological arguments for war and concentrate on the geopolitical factors that actually motivated war. He tried to raise awareness of what the real motivating factors of war were as well as the consequences of war. He was one of the first Americans to really bring the economic implications of war to the forefront of the public conscience. In War is a Racket Butler “names names” and lays out in wonderfully blunt detail how the American “military machine” was used to the benefit of wealthy American industrialists. He noted how proponents of war typically call on God as a supporter of the cause and how they embellish the mission as one of liberation and the spreading of freedom, but that these people tend to shy away from discussing the economic details of military ventures.

Butler didn’t choose sides when it came to expressing his views on war. Butler could certainly be considered a liberal but he spoke out against the liberal FDR administration and also broke ties with anti-fascist groups when they called for war to defend against fascism. In 1935 he commented to a veterans meeting on the subject of the growing interest in the FDR administration to become involved in the conflicts of Europe that, “The political leaders of this country are for another conflict to cover up their blunders.”

Though most today would agree that his isolationist views would have been harmful had they been followed by the country in regard to American involvement in WWII his views on imperialism and the economic implications of war are still as relevant today as ever.

The following is an excerpt from a speech he gave in 1933:

“War is just a racket. A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of people. Only a small inside group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few at the expense of the masses.

I believe in adequate defense at the coastline and nothing else. If a nation comes over here to fight, then we'll fight. The trouble with America is that when the dollar only earns 6 percent over here, then it gets restless and goes overseas to get 100 percent. Then the flag follows the dollar and the soldiers follow the flag.

I wouldn't go to war again as I have done to protect some lousy investment of the bankers. There are only two things we should fight for. One is the defense of our homes and the other is the Bill of Rights. War for any other reason is simply a racket.

There isn't a trick in the racketeering bag that the military gang is blind to. It has its "finger men" to point out enemies, its "muscle men" to destroy enemies, its "brain men" to plan war preparations, and a "Big Boss" Super-Nationalistic-Capitalism.

It may seem odd for me, a military man to adopt such a comparison. Truthfulness compels me to. I spent thirty- three years and four months in active military service as a member of this country's most agile military force, the Marine Corps. I served in all commissioned ranks from Second Lieutenant to Major-General. And during that period, I spent most of my time being a high class muscle- man for Big Business, for Wall Street and for the Bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism.

I suspected I was just part of a racket at the time. Now I am sure of it. Like all the members of the military profession, I never had a thought of my own until I left the service. My mental faculties remained in suspended animation while I obeyed the orders of higher-ups. This is typical with everyone in the military service.

I helped make Mexico, especially Tampico, safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefits of Wall Street. The record of racketeering is long. I helped purify Nicaragua for the international banking house of Brown Brothers in 1909-1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for American sugar interests in 1916. In China I helped to see to it that Standard Oil went its way unmolested.

During those years, I had, as the boys in the back room would say, a swell racket. Looking back on it, I feel that I could have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he could do was to operate his racket in three districts. I operated on three continents.”

http://rationalrevolution.net/war/major_general_smedley_butler_usm.htm