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

by Felix Quigley Fri Nov 04, 2011 10:10

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

see

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-58406195924516...4793#

by pat c Wed Nov 02, 2011 12:29

"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.

by opus diablos - the regressive hypocrite party Wed Nov 02, 2011 12:10

..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.

by Felix Quigley Wed Nov 02, 2011 11:34

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

by opus diablos - the regressive hypocrite party Wed Nov 02, 2011 10:02

..is showing again Felix...I've never even met Patc..so do please try not to personalise what is supposed to be a larger issue than any of us..you'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.

by Felix Quigley Wed Nov 02, 2011 10:01

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

by An Draighneán Donn Wed Nov 02, 2011 08:09

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.

by An Draighneán Donn Wed Nov 02, 2011 07:58

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.

by Felix Quigley Wed Nov 02, 2011 07:50

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

by Felix Quigley Wed Nov 02, 2011 07:42

Patc

"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

by opus diablos - the regressive hypocrite party Tue Nov 01, 2011 15:54

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 fixation..it 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.

by pat c Tue Nov 01, 2011 13:07

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).

by Felix Quigley Tue Nov 01, 2011 08:21

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”

ALL THESE ARE PRO US, BRIT AND FRENCH IMPERIALISM

ALL ARE TOTALLY IRRELEVANT IN THE CONTEXT OF THE MURDER OF GADHAFI AND THE CREATION OF A NEW REGIME OF TERROR IN LIBYA

IT ALMOST LOOKS AS IF YOU ARE MAKING APOLOGIES AND PREPARING TO ACCOMMODATE YOUR FOLLOWERS TO THIS NEW REGIME

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

by opus diablos - the regressive hypocrite party Mon Oct 31, 2011 09:37

You leave out the fact that Gaddafi had entered the other tent(NWO)and engaged with the rendition program...one 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 credit..it will help your own case..as 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?

by An Draighneán Donn Sun Oct 30, 2011 19:21

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.

by pat c Sat Oct 29, 2011 19:37

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.

by opus diablos - the regressive hypocrite party Fri Oct 28, 2011 13:10

for the prosecution

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=27327

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

by pat c Fri Oct 28, 2011 12:57

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

by opus diablos - the regressive hypocrite party Fri Oct 28, 2011 12:45

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..

by pat c Fri Oct 28, 2011 12:16

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.

by pat c Fri Oct 28, 2011 12:10

Well put!

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

http://www.indymedia.ie/article/100807

by opus diablos - the regressive hypocrite party Fri Oct 28, 2011 10:41

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.

by Felix Quigley Fri Oct 28, 2011 10:20

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...http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=27302)

by opus diablos - the regressive hypocrite party Fri Oct 28, 2011 09:58

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

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=27336

and contrarian...you 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 zone..er except for our state of the art F-35s and drones...

by Contrarian Fri Oct 28, 2011 09:19

      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. 

by An DD Fri Oct 28, 2011 01:01

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.

by opus diablos - the regressive hypocrite party Thu Oct 27, 2011 11:30

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 negativity..it 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 Islam...you 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.

by Felix Quigley Thu Oct 27, 2011 09:22

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!

by An Draighneán Donn Thu Oct 27, 2011 00:07

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.

by opus diablos - the regressive hypocrite party Wed Oct 26, 2011 21:28

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.

by Felix Quigley Wed Oct 26, 2011 16:23

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

http://www.demotiximages.com/news/621469/anti-gaddafi-d...ublin

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.

by pat c Wed Oct 26, 2011 14:40

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

by T Tue Oct 25, 2011 15:57

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.

by Declan cullen Mon Oct 24, 2011 15:55

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.

by opus diablos - the regressive hypocrite party Mon Oct 24, 2011 15:17

'...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.

by An DD Mon Oct 24, 2011 14:57

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.

by opus diablos - the regressive hypocrite party Mon Oct 24, 2011 13:39

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.

by An Draighneán Donn Mon Oct 24, 2011 00:40

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.

by An DD Mon Oct 24, 2011 00:13

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.

by The Shadow Sun Oct 23, 2011 23:48

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.

by An Draighneán Donn Sun Oct 23, 2011 22:03

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. 

by opus diablos - the regressive hypocrite party Sun Oct 23, 2011 20:22

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.

by pat c Sun Oct 23, 2011 20:14

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.

by An Draighneán Donn Sun Oct 23, 2011 18:52

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." http://irishantiwar.org/node/1209

by Caobhin Sat Oct 22, 2011 21:29

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.

by tomeile Sat Oct 22, 2011 21:02

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

by AJ Sat Oct 22, 2011 19:34

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.

by pat c Sat Oct 22, 2011 18:47

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?

by Contrarian Sat Oct 22, 2011 18:03

                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.