New Events


no events posted in last week

User Preferences

  • Language - en | ga
  • text size >>
  • make this your indymedia front page make this your indymedia front page

Blog Feeds

Spirit of Contradiction

offsite link What is Dogmatism and Why Does It Matter? Wed Mar 21, 2018 08:10 | Sylvia Smith

offsite link The Case of Comrade Dallas Mon Mar 19, 2018 19:44 | Sylvia Smith

offsite link Review: Do Religions Evolve? Mon Aug 14, 2017 19:54 | Dara McHugh

offsite link Fake News: The Epistemology of Media Wed Jun 07, 2017 11:52 | Gavin Mendel-Gleason

offsite link Officials and Provisionals Sat Apr 01, 2017 22:54 | James O'Brien

Spirit of Contradiction >>

Public Inquiry
Interested in maladministration. Estd. 2005

offsite link RTE presenter accidentally tells the truth

offsite link Orwell’s 1984 arrives in 2018 Ireland Anthony

offsite link Elaine Byrne: Not speaking full truth to power Anthony

offsite link Israel/Ireland: Corruption comparison Anthony

offsite link Irish cowboy town and fake regulatory agencies Anthony

Public Inquiry >>

The Saker
A bird's eye view of the vineyard

offsite link The Saker interviews Michael A. Hoffman II Fri Jun 22, 2018 05:15 | The Saker
[This interview was made for the Unz Review] Introduction by the Saker: I have always had a passion for theology in general and the studies of religions in general. Several

offsite link Moveable Feast Cafe 2018/06/22 ? Open Thread Fri Jun 22, 2018 02:00 | Herb Swanson
2018/06/22 01:00:01Welcome to the ‘Moveable Feast Cafe’. The ‘Moveable Feast’ is an open thread where readers can post wide ranging observations, articles, rants, off topic and have animate discussions of

offsite link Who the Enemies of the People Are, and How They Fight Against Them Fri Jun 22, 2018 00:39 | The Saker
  By Rostislav Ishchenko Translated by Ollie Richardson and Angelina Siard cross posted with Source: If people exist as a subject (at least of history and politics), then

offsite link Ryan Dawson interviews the Saker for the Anti Neocon Report Fri Jun 22, 2018 00:01 | The Saker
On Wednesday I had the pleasure to speak with Ryan Dawson from the Anti Neocon Report.  Check out his website and the interview here: The Saker talks Russia Israel and

offsite link Yemeni War Report ? June 21, 2018: al-Hudaydah Airport Still Remains Contested Thu Jun 21, 2018 16:29 | Scott Fierce clashes between the Saudi-led coalition?s forces and the Houthis are ongoing near the port city of al-Hudaydah in western Yemen. On June 19, the coalition?s forces once again

The Saker >>

Gadaffi Death Chaos Leaves Ntc And Nato Pr Machine With Questions To Be Answered

category international | anti-war / imperialism | opinion/analysis author Saturday October 22, 2011 12:57author by Serf Report this post to the editors

Gadaffi was no saint but the circumstances of his death and the death of his son leave a lot of questions to be answered about this campaign, about NATO, and about the collusion of the media in all of this.


Gadaffi was no saint its true. He squirrelled away billions of oil revenue belonging to the Libyan people for himself and his own, amassed a large arsenal of weaponry and engaged in torture in co-operation with CIA personnel.

But as dictators go, he was pretty mild it has to be said. And a reasonable degree of the wealth did make its way down to the people through infrastructure projects and personal funding. Much has been written about the green revolution and there is evidence that some of its ideas were even put into practice.

The "rebellion" in Libya has its own problematic aspects

The UN security council voted to create a no fly zone in response to media reports of an impending massacre by Gadaffi in Bhenghazi

This mandate was used as an excuse for regime change

The NTC were lead by a CIA AlQaeda asset who cut a deal with the US

NTC atrocities were widespread, but supressed by media

Media lies and disinformation abounded

The Death of Gadaffi and his son are now shrouded in controversy. (see video clip)
There are several conflicting reports but piecing things together, it looks like a drone hit Gadaffi's group and he was injured. He then crawled into a drain to hide. NTC Fighters dragged him out and some time after, he was shot in the head or neck and killed. Probably on orders from on high in order to simplify any possible embarrassing aftermath if he spills the beans on their co-operative torture activities and other matters.

Similarly his son was filmed clearly alive then photos appeared later of his dead body.
here's one such gloating video over pictures of his sons dead body after a "firefight". clearly a lie.
(that last picture is not a peace sign but an up yours to the truth!)

Another high profile casualty of this campaign was the once progressive news channel Al Jazeera (english), (now trumpetted as kosher even by Hilary Clinton)! Apparently reports surfaced courtesy of wikileaks not too long ago regarding collusion between the head of the network and the CIA leading to an embarrassing resignation. After this it became increasingly clear that the stations backers from Qatar had stepped in and made their presence felt and we could no longer trust the balance shown by this once progressive station.

Its news reports on Libya were so biased that I found that just could not watch them after a while.
This is a far cry from the days when US soldiers were ordered to fire on their building during the gulf war.

Also, interestingly, youtube's most accessed version of the death of Gadaffi is allowed by a simple button press. It is only the half of the video after Gadaffi has been killed.

You'll find it a little more difficult to get the whole video on youtube which shows Gadaffi alive. First you'll have to sign in or re-verify your google account. Interesting how there is a difference between accessing both versions!

Easy to get the one that is not controversial

But somewhat Harder to find and access the one that is. Make your own mind up on this one

This same situation occurred with the wikileaks "collateral murder" video until it became too well known.

maybe my computer sucks but coincidentally none of these video clips ever seem to play properly on youtube for me! anyone else seem to have the same problem? ;-)

For those interested there is a very informative article here on the details of Gadaffis capture

Caption: Gadaffi capture video from RT

author by Contrarianpublication date Sat Oct 22, 2011 18:03Report this post to the editors

                But as dictators go, he was pretty mild it has to be said.

Well, apart from the repression, murder, torture, imprisonment, kleptocracy, one-party state, zero freedom of expression, support for other tyrants such as Charles Taylor and Robert Mugabe, nepotism, destruction of the non-oil sections of the economy, expropriation of billions by his family, ineffective public administration, corruption, complete destruction of any functioning civil society, megalomania and delusional fantasies, yeah, apart from all that you could say he was pretty mild I suppose.

Serf's comment is oh so telling.  It says it all, really, about the mindset of the radical left. 

author by pat cpublication date Sat Oct 22, 2011 18:47Report this post to the editors

I think the Colonel was mild in comparison to a lot of other dictators. But those that suffered at his hands would not see him as being at all mild. Thats the crux: there is no acceptable level of torture or killing of imprisoned opponents. Including when the dictators are supported by the West.

I'm sure that you would agree that its wrong for Israel to collectively punish Gaza and parts of the West Bank. Massacring 1,000 civilians in response to makeshift rocket fire* is disproportionate and in breach of international law.

*12 Israelis were killed over a periods of 10 years by these rockets.

Equally bombing of civilian targets in Israel is wrong.

Yes, there are a lot of nasty dictators out there. Many of them sponsored and armed by the West. To the Palestinian people Israel is an alien Dictatorship.

Burma, Uzbekistan, Saudi Arabia, even in Yemen the US bombs an Islamist to keep their dictator in place. No chance of the US bombing the rulers in these countries

As you know I'm opposed to the Iranian Regime but I'm even more opposed to US imperialism. Any change of government should come from within and from below.

I want to see Regime Change in Burma, Uzbekistan, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Iran from within and from below.

Any chance of you agreeing with that?

author by AJpublication date Sat Oct 22, 2011 19:34Report this post to the editors

On Friday, as videos continued to surface showing the fugitive deposed leader being captured alive by a crowd of NTC fighters, the United Nations' human rights office added its voice to calls for an investigation into how Gaddafi died. "Taken together, they were very disturbing," Rupert Colville, spokesman for the office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, said of the images. Gaddafi's body is being kept in a cold storage site in Misrata, where it was taken after NTC fighters captured and killed him in his hometown Sirte on Thursday. It bears a bullet hole in the head, the Reuters news agency reported.

Related Link:
author by tomeilepublication date Sat Oct 22, 2011 21:02Report this post to the editors

The right wing couldn't have got away with it without the support of the left. What happened in Libya is a foretaste of what is on the cards for Syria and Iran. The left provides the humanitarian rationale then the right wing to go in with guns and warplanes .The SWP ,as noted above, called for Western governments to recognize and fund the TNC even after credible reports from eye witnesses to racist lynchings of African workers in areas "liberated" by TNC rebels .
"Those same Western governments who now claim to help the Libyan pro-democracy movement had refused to recognise the Transitional National Council in Benghazi or to send them the Libyan funds frozen in the Western banking system."...........from SWP statement . The link to the article it was taken from is broken

author by Caobhinpublication date Sat Oct 22, 2011 21:29Report this post to the editors

Gaddafi may have outstayed his welcome but he did not deserve his barbaric end at the hands of those cowards. And remember it it wasn't for him we would have been fighting the brits with muskets and pikes. The reporting of this war has been one of the most blatantly one sided ever -endless pictures and reports from the so-called rebel side and nothing from the Gaddafi side. while in reality I bet we will soon see reports of massacres and torture by the new regime judging by the animals fighting for them.

author by An Draighneán Donnpublication date Sun Oct 23, 2011 18:52Report this post to the editors

The SWP front organization, The Irish Anti-War Movement, headed by Richard Boyd Barrett, as early as last March, called on the free state government to recognise the racist lynch mob in Benghasi as the legitimate government of Libya. In case any Irish citizen should ever be tempted to co-operate with this fake anti-war group in any way, please read this disgusting statement from these Nato stooges. Not only did the SWP stooges support the rats, but it supported the racist propaganda that gave "justification" for the lynching of Black people and the rounding up of thousands of Black people and their confinement to consentration camps: "The IAWM gives its full support to the Libyan uprising. It condemns the hypocrisy of western governments which despite their humanitarian rhetoric, have failed to respond to the basic demands of Libya’s Transitional National Council (TNC). It asked for the recognition of the TNC, access to the billions in sequestrated regime funds in order to buy weapons and other crucial supplies, and an immediate halt to the “mercenary flights” that provided Gaddafi’s regime with its foot soldiers."

author by pat cpublication date Sun Oct 23, 2011 20:14Report this post to the editors

Human rights investigations takes a look at the murder of te captured Colonel Muammar al-Gaddafi.

Colonel Muammar al-Gaddafi was reportedly captured and shot dead 20 October. As the evidence below shows the Libyan leader and his son Mutassim were summarily executed by the rebels, sharing the fate of so many Libyans in this conflict.

NATO involvement

NATO have said that a French jet bombed 2 military vehicles in a convoy leaving the area of Sirte at 8.30 am local time. Other reports from the USA suggest a predator drone was involved. In addition, “Sky sources” claim that the RAF was involved in seriously injuring Saif al-Islam, also in Sirte. Reports suggest that the convoy which attempted to break out of Sirte consisted of around 20 vehicles and most of the occupants were killed, either in the air strikes, by AA guns fired by the rebels or by summary execution after being captured and in some cases put on display.

Related Link:
author by opus diablos - the regressive hypocrite partypublication date Sun Oct 23, 2011 20:22Report this post to the editors

I dont think too many people see SWP as the solution. But I'm not sure we see them as the core of the problem either.

Instead of the sectarian flak(which is how this bicker comes over) lets get rid of the real targets FIRST, like maybe concentrate on the pending possibility that the current crew  wil hustle us into NATO.

When thats tackled we can go back to the in-fight.

Triage and priority. Use whats useful, and credit us with a neuron of our own, hey we'll even credit you with not deliberately being DIVISIVE.

Nor do it help to pretend gadaffi was all things bright n beautiful..he was not. Proportion. It'll actually strengthen your case. At present the fucking Right are relishing, as usual, the inability of the left to organise anything other than a self-destruct.
You want to keep THEM happy, keep to your course.

author by An Draighneán Donnpublication date Sun Oct 23, 2011 22:03Report this post to the editors

Instead of putting a brave face on what has happened in Libya, I think its time for the Left to face up to the fact that it was totally duped by the so called "Arab Spring," which was a CIA operation from start to finish.  (It all started with the CIA placing information on Arab governments for Wikileaks to find)  Libya was the goal right from the start.  That being the case, the copy cat actions in Wall Street, Dame Street, etc. are not likely to have any good result.  The "Arab Spring" allowed Nato to destroy a country - and begin the re-conquest of Africa - with the blessing and vocal support of the duped Left. 

author by The Shadowpublication date Sun Oct 23, 2011 23:48Report this post to the editors

It was just somthing simple..Like a peed off fellow Libyan who just maybe had sufferd somhow at this evil bastards  hands and decided on a bit of get even there and then???

Somtimes an application of Occams Razor theory is all thats needed. No CIA  dupes,Neo con conspiricies etc.

Funny how these people who fought a tyrant are now being branded by the Left as animals and barbarians,yet if they were busily massacaring a right wing tinpot dictator they would be applauded as brave heroic freedom fighters finally throwing off the chains of oppression,blah,blah.

Fact is people civil wars uprisings and all that are bloody and nasty affairs where people of either strain get hurt and killed.As we will find out one day on our city streets of Ireland.

author by An DDpublication date Mon Oct 24, 2011 00:13Report this post to the editors

I would never applaud racist lynch mobs, who string up Black people in the market square for sport.  Whatever side such rats are on - Im on the opposite side.

author by An Draighneán Donnpublication date Mon Oct 24, 2011 00:40Report this post to the editors

Well done to the SWP for their support of the NTC:

Mr. Jalil today declared that the restriction Gaddafi had put on Libyan men taking multiple wives will now be dropped, and Sharia law adopted.

Gaddafi had maintained full rights for women.  He even put his life - under constant attack from CIA \ Al Qaeda terrorists - in the hands of women soldiers - to drive home the point that woman are equal to men in every respect.  This was a point that the red neck Western media could never understand - as they tried to paint these brave women soldiers as bimbos.   One of these "bimbos" died and seven others were seriously injured protecting Gaddafi from a CIA \ Al Qaeda attack in 2007.

author by opus diablos - the regressive hypocrite partypublication date Mon Oct 24, 2011 13:39Report this post to the editors

curb the hype

Arab Spring CIA from start?
Nope. The Egyptian street has been disgusted with Mubarak for years, not least his cosying with israel. Ditto across the region, no less than here. The simplifications indicate the lack of experience of the common humanity behind all our borders and divisions. That the empire hijacked the movement is NOT the same thing. Measure your words a little.
Nor does the silence of our own people always indicate apathy or lack of interest. All our history has n ot been airbrushed, despite their efforts.
And this left/right shorhand and lumping people to suit your interpretation, its dictatorial.
Precisely what pisses so many off about the 'left'. The people rightly suspect ideologues.(no pun)
Refine your critique from such crudities, or surrender credibility with the ordinary punter who sees 'left' as atheistic stalinist dictatorship(not an appetiser to our population), which suits the right.
If we are ever going to change anything we'll have to up our game and box at least as clever as the fuckers controlling both sides.

Or we can all keep talking to the converted for another fifty years. And when will ye stop being surprised at the duplicity and shrewdness of the powers that be?No wonder I get accused of cynicism. You need to be, but you also need not to allow cynicism paralyse action for change. Rose tinted dreams of utopia often lead to jaundiced vision...get balanced.

And shadow.. your black and white analysis of good and evil only mirrors those you criticise. Gaddafi was complex, not the handy demon you scapegoat. If he was so evil the collective (and virtuous) press would not need to ridicule his sartorial flamboyance. It revelatory of their racist ignorance and political and ethical poverty, and the hidden agenda unspoken in this 'liberation', as they preen their starched shirts and pin-stripe uniforms. Fascionistas.

author by An DDpublication date Mon Oct 24, 2011 14:57Report this post to the editors

Nobody is doubting that people in North Africa (and everywhere else) are sick and tired of their leaders.  There is a huge ocean of anger.  But, what separates Wall Street from Tahrir Square, is that the protestors in Wall Street dont have the CIA engineering media reports, and setting up and funding groups, who do have a cohesive structure.   Wall Street is pure public anger, Tahrir Square was public anger directed by the CIA - with the vast oil wealth of Libya and the destruction of the Gold Dinar as the prize.

author by opus diablos - the regressive hypocrite partypublication date Mon Oct 24, 2011 15:17Report this post to the editors

'...the protesters in Wall Street dont have the CIA engineering media reports and setting up and funding groups..'

An DD, do you not think so?

Do you really underestimate them to that degree?They have been rehearsing this shit going back to pre-CIA Great Depression suppresions of workers and resistence. Last fright they got was the anti-Nam sixties spontaneous explosions which went global and took them a while to wriggle past and forced them to eventually drop the draft and go back to a volunteer army..and they have been propagandising since to ensure no recurrence, and projecting possible scenarios and their repression as part of the general fleet of ongoing wargaming they delight in.

As I said, slow down and stop being so sure of your presumptions. The people in Wall St are wiser, thats why they are practising democratic lateralism, to lower the target richness of the leader-led environment. Trust no-one, trust everyone. Leadership wil emerge when necessary, then fade when it has served. Otherwise we replace nothing, structurally, just get fresh pyramids of power hunger.

author by Declan cullenpublication date Mon Oct 24, 2011 15:55Report this post to the editors

NATO (using US and UK warplanes) bombed Gaddafi not because they wanted 'save' or liberate the people. They bombed the country because Gaddafi was about to share more of the Oil wealth with his people and leave the Dollar that his Oil was trading in. Libya had free health care, free education, home grants for newly married couples, free seeds for start up farmers, along with a host of other free schemes that helped the population. Libya in fact had the highest standard of living in Africa. You won't hear these facts on RTE or TV3 because all their news is supplied to them by a Intelligence controlled central hub (CIA, MI5 and MI6), so by the time it gets to us is has been turned around, altered and censored to suit the 'official' story of the global police man America and NATO. Does it not seem odd that the first thing NATO wanted to install in the country was a Central Bank? - When will people wake up the the fact the banks are the cause of all the strife and hardship that the globe has undergone in the past, and is still suffering today. If any strong leader in a well armed country tries to stand up to the banks they set the full might of their Military Industrial Complex against that particular country until it has been broken. The banks did need to us their iron fist against Ireland, our 'leaders' rolled over like playful puppies, glad of any attention giving to them by their owner. All they needed to take over Ireland was a pen. Unfortunately the people of Ireland were so busy watching sports, talentless celebrities, and cooking programs on TV to notice the robbery of their country.

author by Tpublication date Tue Oct 25, 2011 15:57Report this post to the editors

It was only a very short while ago that Gaddafi was doing everything right. It is hard to know what it was that upset our peace loving bombing civilians leaders.

Was it that because the IMF never got invited to Libya or that he was going to setup the gold dinar or that he had the sweetest crude oil in the world or because Libya had the highest standard of living in Africa and it was too much of a good example or was it that he was too independent or was it that he was friends of enemies of these guys or was it that he had perhaps one of the more liberal countries of the Muslim world and we are not supposed to think that is possible. Maybe it was something else.



author by pat cpublication date Wed Oct 26, 2011 14:40Report this post to the editors

Another interesting perspective on Libya and on Gaddafi. Full text at link.

Gaddafi Executed, Western imperialist vultures descend on Libya

Posted by parisar on October 26, 2011

24 October 2011. As the world watched videos of the body of Muammar Gaddafi being dragged through the dust, even while perhaps still alive, there was a deafening silence from the corridors of imperial power about this lynching. One could say Gaddafi’s death was emblematic of the entire operation in Libya: his convoy being hit by French and/or US missiles was key to his capture and execution, just as the role of the NATO imperialists all along was decisive in shaping the struggle there. On the very day Gaddafi was killed, the new UK Defence Secretary called on British businessmen to “pack your suitcases” to go to Libya to seize the business opportunities there (and of course to“help with the country’s reconstruction”). The corporate jackals of the world are eagerly waiting to take a bite out of the spoils, including under the contracts already made with Gaddafi. The French ”super” oil company Total had their people on the ground even before Gaddafi’s execution. (A joke making the rounds is that Total wants Total control of Libya’s oil.)

            The following is a slightly excerpted and edited interview with Raymond Lotta by Revolution, newspaper of the Revolutionary Communist Party, USA, which gives some background to the development of the Gaddafi regime. For the full text go to Revolution #226, 8 March 2011.


The Events in Libya in Perspective
The uprising in Libya is an expression of profound discontent in Libyan society. Broad sections of Libyan society, taking inspiration from events in Tunisia and Egypt, have risen against an oppressive regime. And this uprising in Libya is part of the wave of rebellion sweeping through the imperialist-dominated Middle East.
But when you compare events in Libya with those of Egypt, there are two major differences.
First, in Libya, you have a situation where imperialist intrigue is commingling with genuine and just mass upheaval. This makes things highly complicated.
In Egypt, the uprising was overwhelmingly a product of mass discontent against a U.S-backed client regime. But U.S. imperialism had a reliable base within the leadership and command structure of the Egyptian military. Now the outcome of the uprising in Egypt has by no means been sealed. Protests are still erupting, people are debating what’s been accomplished and what hasn’t. U.S. imperialism has important capacities and assets inside Egypt.

That’s not the case in Libya. You don’t have that kind of military apparatus with such close ties to the U.S. So this creates both necessity and opportunity for the U.S. and West European imperialists. They are reaching out to and seeking to bolster oppositional forces in Libya who might be the embryo of an entirely new neocolonial regime, one that would be a more pliant tool of Western interests. And it can’t be ruled out that imperialist operatives have, from the very beginning of this uprising, been assisting some of the oppositional forces.

While there is genuine and just mass upheaval, there are also significant elements of imperialist manoeuvring involved. These are things that we need to analyze and understand more deeply.
The second major difference between what’s happening in Libya and the upheavals in other parts of the Middle East is Gaddafi himself. Muammar Gaddafi is not the same as Mubarak.
I know this is not the official story line of the State Department or the narrative put out on CNN about a crazed, autocratic ruler… but Gaddafi actually had popular support when he came to power in 1969, especially from sections of the intelligentsia and professional and middle classes. He had popular bases of support for many years of his rule.

For three decades, Gaddafi was viewed by many inside and outside of Libya as someone standing up for the genuine national interests of Libya… as someone who stood against imperialism and the Israeli occupation of Palestine.
Gaddafi is not the same as the openly servile Hosni Mubarak… even though the Gaddafi regime never fundamentally broke with or fundamentally challenged imperialism

Related Link:
author by Felix Quigleypublication date Wed Oct 26, 2011 16:23Report this post to the editors

Demonstrators gathered in Dublin today to show their solidarity with the people of Libya in their struggle against Muammar Gaddafi and his regime. The demonstration was addressed by newly elected United Left Alliance TD Richard Boyd Barrett and other speakers.


This was a political crime carried out by a group in Ireland which calls itself “socialist” but which is really masquerading under the name of “socialist” in order to do the dirty work for Obama, Cameron and Sarkozy.


What is the present position of Richard Boyd Barrett and this very disreputable grouping which must now URGENTLY be exposed in front of the whole of the Irish working class, especially of the youth, for the political scoundrels that they are. DO look up this link


because it shows this utterly Left Fascist Imperialist group standing behind a banner the likes of which you have rarely in your life ever seen. Suffice to say that this banner was part of the process which set in train the events which led to the sodomizing of Muammar Gadhafi, horrific torture of Muammar, his son, murders at the hands of savages, exiling of his family, torture of blacks who had been well treated by Gadhafi etc.

author by opus diablos - the regressive hypocrite partypublication date Wed Oct 26, 2011 21:28Report this post to the editors

if you think of them as misinformed.. at least till they prove its more sinister..none of us, not even you, has the full picture.

author by An Draighneán Donnpublication date Thu Oct 27, 2011 00:07Report this post to the editors

I hear a lot of people careless saying that there was justifiable anger against Gaddafi in Libya.  There was certainly anger - but, was it justified?

Who exactly were angry?  In the first place the businessmen who want to get their claws on Libya's oil.  Does Richard Boyd Barrett think these businessmen were justified?  Then there were the Islamic extremists, who want to impose their mideval rule on the country.  Are they justified?  Then there are the professional classes, who want to use their education to exploit everyone else - as they do in Ireland.  Are they justified?  Some naive people will claim that the rebels want "democracy."  Nothing could be further from the truth.  They want to destroy whatever democracy Libya had, by destroying the People's Congresses - and set up what we have in Ireland, i.e. an oligarchy where the business class rule, and the plebs scribble numbers on pages every so often.

author by Felix Quigleypublication date Thu Oct 27, 2011 09:22Report this post to the editors

Opus why not expand the discussion!


We are just trying to get knowledge about the Irish "left" and what are their credentials for that claim to to be left. You will appreciate that it is not just Libya, but that it is the whole phenomenon of the Arab "Spring", and is it a spring or a winter, that is the most vital question in international issues today?

Barrett has also written on his site:

The Tunisian and Egyptian people are showing they are the force that can bring democracy, justice and freedom to the Mid-East region in a way that US bombs in Iraq and Afghanistan could never do. If the US and western power’s have any commitment to the democracy they claim to champion in the region they should end all military and financial aid to the Mubarak dictatorship and call on Mubarak to step down.

Are Tunisia and Egypt heading towards democracy? that really is the question!

Why does somebody not do a little research and tell us what the present position of Barrett and the SWP are, on these vital matters, and including on the real situation in Libya, which includes the horror of the death of Muammar Gadhafi and his son, the reaction of Mrs Clinton to the news "I came, I saw, he died" and so on


I mean Barrett is reading this so why does HE not explain!


author by opus diablos - the regressive hypocrite partypublication date Thu Oct 27, 2011 11:30Report this post to the editors

because i dont tend to do guesswork and have no special insight into SWP thinking.

On the face of it looks as though they've fallen for the blizzard of PR-op-agenda...and they should be wiser than that..but I'm slower with the tar-brush than many..and try to reserve my comments and feedback for blatant usually emerges if you let it stew long enough.

On Gadaffi..the news of his attackers finale gets more halloween by the day...and speaks volumes about the depravity of the crew replacing him..lots happening very fast..there are times to step back and let it unfold...and times when something can be done...I dont credit SWP with the leverage you seem to..and know enough about the subversive techniques of the underground operatives to stay wary without expecting too much of the mere mortals.

Tunisia and Egypt are struggling towards democratioc change..but the inperial interests are determined to see that happen on their terms...and your hallowed zionists are manipulating islamic extremism as surely as Unc Sam and britannia..these networks dont have borders, nations, including Israel, are just means to their divisive ends of post-national and trans-national domination...

and the arab spring, summer, falls and winters are not the most central issue...climate turbulence and hyperinflation are clouds gathering while the media play their dramatisations for our distraction...and I reckon we wil see a fresh raft of unexpected crises emerging as it unfolds...getting fixated on Barrett seems shortsighted..he's a microbe like the rest of us in the scheme of things...though, again, events can change that in quick-time..meantime..keep watching it..and dont fall for the tar-brushing of are profoundly off course with that track..there are muslim bigots(a few)but thats mostly a reaction created by fundamentalist KKKristians and fundamentalist Zionists..a poisonous brew well out through the harness of reason and balance we should try to bring to such serious threats to us ALL.
Hope that satisfies.

author by An DDpublication date Fri Oct 28, 2011 01:01Report this post to the editors

As I said before, the European and US Left were totally duped over Libya.  This murderous attack on a sovereign nation, that was not attacking any other nation, or in possession of WMDs, or even slaughtering its own citizens - at least not more than any sovereign state would do to protect itself from a terrorist assault - could never have happened if the Left had not been conned into stupidity by the events in Egypt and Tunisia.

Its time the leaders of the Left, including Boyd Barratt, asked themselves what went so terribly wrong.  Its also time they came clean and apologised to those who had trusted them.

author by Contrarianpublication date Fri Oct 28, 2011 09:19Report this post to the editors

      I want to see Regime Change in Burma, Uzbekistan, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Iran from within and from below.

     Any chance of you agreeing with that?


Sure.  And I'd add a few more to the list too.  Syria, North Korea, Belarus, Cuba, Zimbabwe for starters.  There's lots more. 

And I wouldn't restrict beneficial regime change to that which occurs solely from within and from below.  It took a massive foreign invasion to achieve regime change in Vichy France, 1944. 

author by opus diablos - the regressive hypocrite partypublication date Fri Oct 28, 2011 09:58Report this post to the editors

a little evidence that the duping was not the hopes the superlatives might tone down

and left out the US and Britannia, I notice, and have no problem with the Israeli rogue state that flouts international law at will, even as it quotes it to its advantage in such abubdance machiavelli would be embarrassed...

How many has the axis of virtue, and its NATO military wing, slain and crippled and robbed and looted, just while you were hitting the keyboard to spell out your list??We now have the Lib-Ir-Af-Pak front, leaning towards Syr-Ir-Chi-Ven-Ru, et al, expansion...

I would guess, its an imprecise science since they gave up counting their collateral damage, and escalated their ramped up  spouted lies through their tame think-tanks(whole new dimension of tank-warfare?)about how depleted uranium makes your bones grow stronger, that we're into multiples. And then you have the 'civil' wars with multinational forces of mercenaries, and R2P civilians who happen to be armed to the tonsils and the no fly except for our state of the art F-35s and drones...

author by Felix Quigleypublication date Fri Oct 28, 2011 10:20Report this post to the editors

Democratic Libya, created by NATO member states’ bombers and task forces, has declared itself an Islamic state. The Transitional National Council of Libya has already announced that no other laws, except for sharia, will act in the country any longer.

The "Founding Fathers" from NATO, engaged by internal debt problems and division of Libyan oil and gas resources, only sluggishly called the TNC to comply with democratic norms and human rights.

The peacekeepers on the aircraft carriers did not want to admit that "dictator" Gaddafi, who trampled on NATO money and who actually created a unified Libya 40 years ago, warned that he fought Islamic militants. Instead, the father of the new Libyan democracy and a newborn girl, President Sarkozy, suggested Prime Minister of Great Britain David Cameron to shut up and to not pry into the affairs of the Eurozone.

In parallel, the Islamist party Ennahda (Revival) has won in the elections in Tunisia, from which the Arab Spring began. The party was supported by at least 40% of voters. As well as in Iran in 1979, this party is headed by a politician who was in 20-year exile.

Probably, the process of Islamization of the Maghreb will continue and cover at least Egypt, much to the surprise of NATO. Although, actually, all this happens within the conclusions made by the French Orientalists: when socialism goes, Islam comes. And all the overthrown regimes in the Maghreb, at least once, declared their socialist status.

(NATO establishes its first Islamic state...



author by opus diablos - the regressive hypocrite partypublication date Fri Oct 28, 2011 10:41Report this post to the editors

Er..felix..these regions have been islamic for centuries...and its only since Christian colonisation ramped up(with the lacing of zionist fundamentalism injected to facilitate the transfer from coal to oil)that the BLOWBACK extremism escalated.

A little balance.

They have yet to do a fraction of the damage the self-intoxicated 'west' is inflicting. Climb in off your branch, its creaking.

author by pat cpublication date Fri Oct 28, 2011 12:10Report this post to the editors

Well put!

There is an opposition to the blowback Islamists, read about it here:

author by pat cpublication date Fri Oct 28, 2011 12:16Report this post to the editors

But Vichy France was already occupied by a foreign power. An invasion of Iran, Syria, even Burma would likely increase support for the dictators. Syria is in a particularly delicate situation, there is a possibility of a sectarian civil war. Want to invade in the midst of that? Because they feel safe under the present Regime, Christians and moderate Muslims support it.

I want to see Mugabe toppled but again any "benefical" invasion would likely result in tribal civil war.


Change must come from within and from below.

author by opus diablos - the regressive hypocrite partypublication date Fri Oct 28, 2011 12:45Report this post to the editors

the junta is starting to talk to An Sung Su Ki..and she has called for PATIENCE..from her followers,, but then she'd be an expert in that field..

author by pat cpublication date Fri Oct 28, 2011 12:57Report this post to the editors

From this weeks Weekly Worker:

The murder of Gaddafi is a victory for imperialism. While Gaddafi was no more a revolutionary than Saddam Hussein, neither military figures were the puppets that imperialism expects from bourgeois politicians. It is no coincidence that both countries have huge oil resources.

Gaddafi was apparently killed or injured by Nato bombing. While imperialism faces world economic crisis, the imperialist military still has a privileged status, which functions without the cuts faced by social services throughout the world. Imperialism always attempts to use military technology to suppress its economic contradictions.

The killing of Gaddafi is an implicit threat to genuine revolutionaries who did not share Gaddafi’s petty bourgeois politics, but will surely face the same imperialist intervention in a future genuine socialist revolution.

Earl Gilman
El Nuevo Topo

author by opus diablos - the regressive hypocrite partypublication date Fri Oct 28, 2011 13:10Report this post to the editors

for the prosecution

dont forget the salt cellar..but it does tend to deliver non-speculative and considered analysis.

author by pat cpublication date Sat Oct 29, 2011 19:37Report this post to the editors

Full article at link.

An inconvenient execution

The death of Gaddafi will not bring freedom to Libya, argues James Turley

“That’s for Lockerbie!” screamed The Sun over a picture of Muammar al-Gaddafi (October 21). After more than four decades in power, the former Libyan dictator had just met his sorry end - hauled from a sewage drain and summarily executed. The rebel forces - supported by Nato bombardment - had finally concluded this phase of the Libyan civil war.

Gruesome shots of his bloody corpse dominated the next 24 hours of the news cycle. Slightly more disturbingly (death being, after all, one of the more common side effects of war), more than one paper in Britain led on reports that the erstwhile tyrant spent his last moments pleading for his life. To the likes of the Mail and the Mirror, as well as The Sun, this was cause for sadistic gloating.

Of course, it was most definitely not for Lockerbie. The soldiers who dragged him off chanting “God is great!” did not have the 1988 bombing of a Pan Am flight over a Scottish town foremost in their minds as they cocked their rifles and took aim. The true nature of the forces which have now been left in charge of Libya - after six months of war effectively propped up by Nato - is becoming increasingly clear, and it is not a pretty picture to western eyes. The somewhat distasteful spectacle of Gaddafi’s corpse on public display in a cold storage unit will not be the worst of it.

Gaddafi’s career as de facto head of state was, to put it mildly, colourful. He came to power in 1969, on the back of a more or less bloodless military coup. Two contradictory dynamics were at work around him - firstly, the long process of decolonisation and nationalist struggle against imperialism; and secondly, the rolling back of pan-Arabism, which had suffered a serious setback in the wake of Israel’s crushing victory in the 1967 war.

Gaddafi positioned himself as inheritor of the mantle of Gamal Abdul Nasser, the Egyptian president; he proceeded to concoct an ideology for himself which combined elements of pan-Arabism, Islamism and pseudo-socialistic rhetoric. He also cemented his power through purges of the army and complicated negotiations with the various tribal forces that populate the vast wilderness within Libya’s borders.

Inevitably, he ended up at loggerheads with the US, which had other plans for the region; Libyan material support for forces as diverse as the Palestinian liberation fighters and the Provisional IRA hardly helped matters. The Lockerbie bombing, and other atrocities laid at his door, were wheeled out to justify economic sanctions and airstrikes alike.

Related Link:
author by An Draighneán Donnpublication date Sun Oct 30, 2011 19:21Report this post to the editors

Most of the world thought Muammar Gaddafi was taking things easy in the last few years. What the Western media was hiding from us, is that he had been busy building the greatest humanitarian project of all time - the Man Made River, which dwarfs Bill Gates' ego-efforts, and which will save the lives of millions of people and make the desert bloom. It says a lot that the Nato terrorists went out of their way to bomb this humanitarian project. It shows the kind of anti-human vermin they are.

author by opus diablos - the regressive hypocrite partypublication date Mon Oct 31, 2011 09:37Report this post to the editors

You leave out the fact that Gaddafi had entered the other tent(NWO)and engaged with the rendition of the reasons he could not be brought to trial. Less black/ white, more shadey reality...And Gates could get his ego massaged by adding a wing to Harvard..give an ounce of will help your own for the NATO bombing of the GMR, they were careful to restrict it to the final feeder pipes..its one of the resources they're after..part of the bombing plan was to restrict water supplies to the coast til they had their fresh 'mission accomplished'.

I'd even say the plan was to let gaddafi finish out the project before striking..then its just a matter of hooking up and syphoning.

And Gadaffi was no shrinking violet when it came to ego. This black/white polarised picture is one of the reasons the 'left', or whatever you want to label opposition to totalitarian marketeering, gets so little traction with the thinking public..they shy away from polemic as misrepresentative of the reality they observe, often just on sheer instinct that its a cat in a bag rather than the promised pig in the poke. They have a cannier sense of the complexityof the issues, even if they have restricted access to clean information. Try crediting the public with a brain cell. Otherwise whats the point in even trying to expand the information supply?

author by Felix Quigleypublication date Tue Nov 01, 2011 08:21Report this post to the editors

PatC writes about the foulest of murders


An inconvenient execution


The Lockerbie bombing, and other atrocities laid at his door


And Opus


“You leave out the fact that Gaddafi had entered the other tent”






Both Opus and PatC unfortunately cannot take up a position of defence of Gadhafi against Imperialism and the question to be asked is why not


The defence of Muammar Gadhafi is the same in relative terms as the defence which Leon Trotsky made towards Haile Selassie in Abyssinia in the 1930s (AGAINST NAZISM AND THIS IS NAZISM ONCE AGAIN)


The problem here is that the position towards the murder of Muammar Gadhafi is equivocal on the part of a section of the left as represented here. That is a most serious issue and a serious state of affairs for workers and youth in Ireland


author by pat cpublication date Tue Nov 01, 2011 13:07Report this post to the editors

Read the actual articles and comments I have posted (not headlines) and you will see that I opposed the killing of Gaddafi and described it as murder. I have consistently opposed the NATO onslaught against Libya. In opposing Imperialism you do not have to makr Gaddafi into a shining knight. The articles make clear his anti imperialist actions but also his failings. Opus can speak for himself but he has been consistently anti imperialist in his postings here (imho).

author by opus diablos - the regressive hypocrite partypublication date Tue Nov 01, 2011 15:54Report this post to the editors

Felix seems to be caught in his ideological timewarp...IT ALMOST LOOKS AS IF... he wont see what is written because he would rather beat a preconcieved drum than read the actual statement made.

Any qualification of his black/white analysis with the slightest nuance upsets the Trotskyist 1930s analysis of 21st cent. reality.

This is not Nazism once again..get out of the is a far more complex and further evolved situation devoid of many of National Socialism's characteristics..whatever lessons and parallels may be drawn from approximations and resemblances; and to equate is to distort.

It is indicative of a rigidity closer to Stalinism, than what I understand as the more pragmatic stance of Trotsky(but I'm claiming no expertise on either, they having multiple interpreters at each others throats without my joining the discordance).

As I say, your dictatorial infallibility on all things 'left' is more Stalinist monopoly than pragmatic and realistic consideration...and reminds of nothing so much as the sterile self-satisfactory circular argumentation that abounded in the ideological rigor mortis of the sixties and seventies, which did nothing but alienate those seeking a coherent critique of the circumstances of the time.

But keep muddying the waters, those who actually give a damn, will steer around all dictators, and work out a collective analysis despite your certitude of rectitude. Sorry Felix, but its called democratic praxis. It requires both input and attention to feedback with critical receptiveness, as opposed to reactionary ideological dismissal.

author by Felix Quigleypublication date Wed Nov 02, 2011 07:42Report this post to the editors



"Read the actual articles and comments I have posted (not headlines) and you will see that I opposed the killing of Gaddafi and described it as murder. I have consistently opposed the NATO onslaught against Libya"


Sure you did!  (irony!)


The memory of Muammar Gadhafi as a humanist anti-imperilist fighter has to be defended

author by Felix Quigleypublication date Wed Nov 02, 2011 07:50Report this post to the editors

there is hope for old Ireland yet!


"It is indicative of a rigidity closer to Stalinism, than what I understand as the more pragmatic stance of Trotsky(but I'm claiming no expertise on either"


No expertise Opus. Whew that was a close one! Than goodness you added that!


As I said to your Patc friend the memory of this great humanist anti-imperialist fighter has to be fought for in Ireland, and it will be an important factor in the education of Irish workers and youth as capitalism is in crisis

author by An Draighneán Donnpublication date Wed Nov 02, 2011 07:58Report this post to the editors

A chara, try to park your Western cynicism for a minute.  There are good men in the world.  There are great men in the world.  Muammar Gaddafi was one of them.

author by An Draighneán Donnpublication date Wed Nov 02, 2011 08:09Report this post to the editors

You are right a chara, Muammar Gaddafi was the best friend the Irish people ever had.  He helped us when we were being murdered on our own streets, and when the so called Irish government was collaborating with the enemy, Vichy style.  Irish workers need to honour their friends - like Muammar Gaddafi - and know their enemies, like Fine Gael, Fianna Fáil, Labour, the SP and the SWP and PSF.

author by Felix Quigleypublication date Wed Nov 02, 2011 10:01Report this post to the editors

What an interesting comment


That is also my understanding of Gadhafi and Ireland. He was obviously familiar with the great Irish anti-Imperialist history of struggle against Britain

And this is now alive again as Irish workers and youth are caught up in the world crisis of capitalism, so this aspect of Gadhafi AND WHAT BARBARITIES HAVE TAKEN PLACE IN LIBYA are more than anything else relevant to the occupiers of Dame Street and other ocupier fighters throughout Ireland!


Gadhafi and the DEFENCE OF GADHAFI had become and is even now the touchstone of all Irish revolutionary politics today


In other words if you do not defend Muammar Gadhafi, and now his memory, unconditionally against the NATO and as is shown in Libya NATO's Sharia tools, then you will not fight for Irish workers and youth either.


I defend Muammar Gadhafi and his memory as an anti-Imperialist humanist and fighter, and this UNCONDITIONAL defence must become part of the Irish socialist tradition

author by opus diablos - the regressive hypocrite partypublication date Wed Nov 02, 2011 10:02Report this post to the editors showing again Felix...I've never even met do please try not to personalise what is supposed to be a larger issue than any of're not going to drag me into that cul de sac.

Meantime, if you bothered actually reading what I've written, you might notice I have consistently argued against NATOInc., and that goes back many years and will continue despite your best efforts...and why do I suspect it may be my refusal to share your rose-tinted view of Israel is the real reason for your distortions? The preference for ad hominems usually indicates a retreat from the issues.

As for ADD's gratitude for Gaddafi's arms shipments...thats one we are not going to agree on, though I second your opinion of the cowardice and moral duplicity of the southern governments down the years..not least the great republican CJH, who led the state to its present state, with the help of a general collusion in the greedfest. Had they gotten off their arses and stood in solidarity the armed resistance might have been avoided...but that takes us away from the thread and I doubt we will agree, certainly not in the available space.

And your appetite for seeking enemies(which probably now includes me) is precisely the reason I have no desire to see your 'republican' triumph any more than I revelled in CJH's daydream, which forced me out of this island to find a days work while he shopped in Paris and stroked his corrupt Tiger into being.
While your republican heros were kneecapping kids for smoking a joint, or tar-and-feathering young girls for being young girls, and provoking counter-terror to your bombings of Irish towns and Irish people(or for that matter British Tommies, some of whom were deluded enough to think they were keeping the loyalist thugs away from your family)others were actually trying to wake this political entity out of its green catholic somnolence and drag it towards an inclusive future that the introducers of republican ideas had been attempting for centuries. And trying to get it into the thick skulls of the counter-sectarian gunmen that most of those introducers were protestants whom you would class in your sophisticated analysis as Brit enemies. Mo chara. Some of us had to search your fucking rubble.

author by Felix Quigleypublication date Wed Nov 02, 2011 11:34Report this post to the editors

Where is your sense of proportion and your sense of humour!


You take exception to this


"As I said to your Patc friend the memory of this great humanist anti-imperialist fighter has to be fought for in Ireland, and it will be an important factor in the education of Irish workers and youth as capitalism is in crisis"


So I will re-write and the sense is the same, exactly


"As I said to Patc the memory of this great humanist anti-imperialist fighter has to be fought for in Ireland, and it will be an important factor in the education of Irish workers and youth as capitalism is in crisis"


After excising a couple of words which were not at all important to me we are left with the essence, which is what has happened in Libya, and how workers in Ireland, working class youth and students are ddressing and will address the above.


Who was Muammar Gadhafi?


I am saying, more than once now, that he was a humanist anti-imperialist fighter, whose name is going to go down in history, and whose memory is going to be revered in the centuries to come


It is quite clear to me when I read back over the contributions of yourself and of Patc on this thread that this is NOT your position.


For example and going on memory Patc was using the strange term "an inconvenient execution" and you Opus was referring to Muammar Gadhafi as being in the opposite tent or in another tent, the meaning is the same.


These are political positions related to the topic which i would like to see addressed, rather than talking about Israel or "enemies"


In your answer, if you do answer, just say in simple language where you stand towards the memory of Muammar Gadhafi

author by opus diablos - the regressive hypocrite partypublication date Wed Nov 02, 2011 12:10Report this post to the editors

..about my senses of proportion or humour.

I think a rescan of our exchanges will show anyone with the slightest interest who retains a shred of either..I wont be taking YOUR judgement any more than i think you will mine.

On Gaddaffi's memory??Was it Zhou Enlai said it was too early to call the French Revolution?

Is that simple enough for you?Other things ARE happening..its a bit like asking what I think of Dunkirk on D-Day, or maybe more, like Pearl Harbour day...the empire is on a fucking roll..NOT the time for autopsies.

But you work away; hey, write his biography, then I'll know a bit more about him, when I get a chance to finish the five I'm trying to wade through at the minit.

author by pat cpublication date Wed Nov 02, 2011 12:29Report this post to the editors

"For example and going on memory Patc was using the strange term "an inconvenient execution""

That was the title of an article from the Weekly Worker, not authored by me. I often find their article titles a bit odd. Its the content that counts.

author by Felix Quigleypublication date Fri Nov 04, 2011 10:10Report this post to the editors

The murder of Gadhafi needs to be read in same sense as murder in Hague of Milosevic



Number of comments per page
locked We are currently not accepting any more comments on this article.
© 2001-2018 Independent Media Centre Ireland. Unless otherwise stated by the author, all content is free for non-commercial reuse, reprint, and rebroadcast, on the net and elsewhere. Opinions are those of the contributors and are not necessarily endorsed by Independent Media Centre Ireland. Disclaimer | Privacy