Beni Wallid GREEN AGAIN!

Red Brigade wrote:

Does any one know if they have created a Basic People's Congress in Bani Wallid? Or if they are trying to rebuild socialism, direct democracy, and the Jamahiriya?

Matthijs wrote:

Of course they have. The people of Libya are rising up massively to bring back the direct democracy of the Jamahiriya that existed thanks to the benevolence of comrade Gaddafi, who was just a symbolic figurehead and had no real power at all and was beloved by everyone except for the Al-Qaeda puppets.

Matthijs wrote:

but that is a rather small thinking error compared to the idea that Libya was "an African Switzerland"),

Quote:

You do realise that Libya had the highest human development index in Africa before the civil war, right? Or do you not consider the HDI to be at all valid?

OP-Bagration wrote:

Of course the HDI is not valid. HDI includes the GDP per capital. Therefore, in an oil country as Libya, the total wealth increases artificially the HDI. If you compare with Tunisia and its dictator Ben Ali, Tunisia has practically the same HDI. Yet, it has much less oil. So it means that Tunisia's HDI is actually better. However, we know that this country is not socialist and suffers from heavy poverty and inequalities. The Gini coefficient would be a better index, but you can't find it because Gaddafi had no interest in giving it.

Quote:

Plus Equatorial guinea is said to have a high HDI for same reasons... so we really need to begin looking at how well wealth was distributed.

Quote:

While many in Libya in the west in particular complained of unemployment there did not appear to be anyone starving to death, did anyone notice that?

Quote:

I think it is hard to argue that a great deal of good was accomplished there even if Gaddafi had negative sides.

Matthijs wrote:

Of course, that's not possible, because the Great Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya was a stateless, classless utopia run by direct democracy, so of course they didn't have "officials"

Matthijs wrote:

Hey wow, she is the wife of an Italian guy who arranged Ghaddafi's escort service, and personal friend to Ghaddafi. I'm sure that someone who has been acting as the Madame of the rich and powerful has a keen political insight on life at the bottom in Libya. Next up on Russia Today, it's Ghaddafi's nurse, Ghaddafi's mistress and Ghaddafi's swimming pool guard explaining the finer points of direct democracy in the Great Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya. After that, we have an exclusive interview with Alejandro from the Korean Friendship Association explaining how people's power works in North Korea.

Matthijs wrote:

At the risk of having one big post full of sarcasm, I do want to mention one thing in all seriousness, and that is the "Al-Qaeda" thing. It's one of the issues in which vulgar "anti-imperialist" leftists have developed an amazing kind of doublespeak. Compare:

On 9/11: "Al-Qaeda doesn't really exist as such, that is just a simplification used to justify the bombing of Afghanistan and Iraq. Al-Qaeda is not some kind of centralised organisation, and it cannot be somehow defeated by invading countries."

On Libya: "Like Gaddafi said, all his opponents are Al-Qaeda operatives."

Weird.

OP-Bagration wrote:

He obviously gave much money to his friends, people in Tripoli and the al-Gadafa. But in the end, he failed.

Quote:

Gaddafi gave lots of money to African nations and Pan-African organizations like the African Union.

Quote:

He also gave money to different revolutionary and anti-imperialsit organizations, other then the IRA.

OP-Bagration wrote:

USA are doing the same with United nations and many countries.

OP-Bagration wrote:

In the 1980's he assassinated Thomas Sankara and helped the invasion of Liberia in 1989, then of Sierra Leone. 400 000 people died in these wars. He was also an imperialist.

matthijs wrote:

I just want to say that at this point, registering one's disgust with Dagoth Ur's (apparently orthodox Trotskyist) position on World War II is kind of pointless, because it only dignifies that kind of nonsense unnecessarily.

matthijs wrote:

What would it concretely have meant for the communist resistance movements in occupied Europe to consistently say: "As soon as the fascists are significantly weakened, we should stop opposing them, because the US, who just liberated us, are now the main major threat"? At what specific moment would that be, anyway?

matthijs wrote:

Right after Stalingrad? Let's say that in 1944 (after years of communist calls for a second front), the western Allies are planning D-Day and they ask the French resistance to sabotage key German facilities. In the ortho-Trot opinion, they should have said: "Sorry, can't do that; the Red Army has already reached the Romanian border, and Nazi Germany is doomed. We'll just sit here and allow the Germans to implement murderous scorched-earth strategies until the Soviets have finally made it over here."

matthijs wrote:

Brilliant stuff.

Red Brigade wrote:

How did he help assassinate Thomas Sankara this is the first time i've ever heard something like that. Would you like to give a source or elaborate on that. By invasion of Liberia and Sierra Leone do you mean the Liberian and Sierra Leone civil wars? Because Libya never invaded them Gaddafi did mistakenly support Charles Taylor and the NPF, but Libya never invaded either country. Gaddafi was not an imperialist.

Matthijs wrote:

Hey wow, she is the wife of an Italian guy who arranged Ghaddafi's escort service, and personal friend to Ghaddafi. I'm sure that someone who has been acting as the Madame of the rich and powerful has a keen political insight on life at the bottom in Libya. Next up on Russia Today, it's Ghaddafi's nurse, Ghaddafi's mistress and Ghaddafi's swimming pool guard explaining the finer points of direct democracy in the Great Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya. After that, we have an exclusive interview with Alejandro from the Korean Friendship Association explaining how people's power works in North Korea.

Fellow Comrade wrote:

You do realise that Libya had the highest human development index in Africa before the civil war, right? Or do you not consider the HDI to be at all valid?

Your anti-Gaddafi sentiment is about as irrational as RB's talk of direct democracy, which in all fairness did exist to a certain degree. Have you not heard of media spin and misrepresentation of the truth? One thing that makes me laugh is the talk of Gaddafi stock piling gold as a show of how excessively he lived in the Western media. It never gets mentioned that he was actually stock piling gold as a means to support a new pan African currency based on a gold standard.

It's so sad that even Leftists end up swallowing the bullshit.

Aurelian wrote:

@ Mathijis: Lets employ a bit of historicity here, if your enemy says you did it, and you say you did it, then you probably did it. Both sides acknowledge there are many Gaddafi supporters still out there. Where exactly do you think those 1.7 million people who came to support him in Tripoli went? Where are all the loyalists who held out in Ghadames, Sabha, and Bani Walid? Maybe some of those people will come to accept the NTC, but judging by the revolt against the NTC by former militias, it does not create a situation where the Gaddafi loyalists will give up per se. All the independent journalists in Libya such as Voltaire Network, global research, Lizzie phelan have concluded as much and even RT was giving some good reports before the "end" of the civil war. Seriously, do you just get all your information from al-Jazeera

Red Brigade wrote:

Gaddafi gave lots of money to African nations and Pan-African organizations like the African Union. He also gave money to different revolutionary and anti-imperialsit organizations, other then the IRA.

Matthijs wrote:

Does that include such leading lights of anti-imperialism as Austrian fascist leader Jörg Haider? I'm honestly curious about this.

Quote:

The U.S.-led attack on Libya is an American operation of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), planned and initiated long before any “protests” started in Libya this February.
Under the guise of “protecting innocent civilians,” the U.S. military, Africom, NATO, and the United Nations are now bombing Libya, raining destruction upon the Libyan economic and military infrastructure and killing untold numbers of innocent Africans. Here are just 10 of the many obvious reasons why this so-called “spontaneous” protest was from beginning to end another CIA operation.

1. The United States' motives are suspect. The “humanitarian” concern expressed by the American government has not taken long to evaporate. The claim that Col. Muammar Gadhafi was “slaughtering his own people” cannot be substantiated by any independent evidence, and no “journalists” are even asking for evidence. The White House's policy advisor and Israeli lobby official Dennis Ross claimed that “up to 100,000 people could be massacred, and everyone would blame us for it.” Ross has produced no proof of a massacre—and Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Admiral Mike Mullen both confirmed, “We've seen no confirmation whatsoever.” Russian military has been monitoring the unrest via satellite from the very beginning, and they say that the claimed “slaughter” is imaginary. CIA √

2. The world media have shown a shocking lack of curiosity. Just as with the U.S. debacle in Iraq and Afghanistan, the New York Times leads a coordinated campaign of propaganda, rumor-mongering, and the demonization of Muammar Gadhafi. Some articles appear to be written in advance and closely follow the prescription of the Washington consulting firm Wirthlin Group, which determined that “the message most likely to motivate public support for war on Iraq was the perception of Saddam Hussein as an evil madman who even committed atrocities against his own people and had to be stopped.” The major media's appetite for this “killing-his-own-people” line is textbook CIA propaganda and belies the fact that they are at this very hour operating from a swank hotel that is under Gadhafi's total control in Tripoli. Even though they continue to spread unsubstantiated “rapes” and “cluster bombings,” and “fears of massacres,” and child-targeting, these “journalists” don't appear to be frightened for their lives. CIA √

3. The “rebels” are Al-Qaeda. When Col. Gadhafi first claimed that the rebels were members of Al-Qaeda, no one believed him. But according to a 2007 report from the Combating Terrorism Center at West Point titled “Al-Qa'ida's Foreign Fighters In Iraq,” eastern Libya—the very center of the current uprising—is a well-known Al-Qaeda stronghold. The same people the U.S. is fighting three wars to destroy are the “rebels” the U.S. is protecting, supplying, training, and attempting to install into power in Libya. And if the West Point military analysts knew this to be true in 2007, why did they not bomb those Al-Qaeda strongholds in the way they are bombing Gadhafi's forces now? CIA √

4. Rebel “leaders” are CIA agents. The “rebel” leader, a man named Khalifa Hifter, left the Libyan government and set up his own militia financed by the CIA. He then spent two decades living within minutes of CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia, where, according to Rep. Dennis Kucinich, he had no apparent source of income. Shortly after the 2011 “protests” began, the CIA airlifted him into Benghazi and told the press to start calling him the “leader” of the rebels. CIA √

5. The Libyan uprising is not “spontaneous.” The incident that allegedly spurred the Libyan “rebellion” was the arrest of an activist lawyer on February 15, 2011. This ignited a wave of protests that spilled over onto the

Internet and other media. But an unusually large number of YOUTUBE videos and TWITTER messages have emerged that are suspiciously similar and seem to be a product of the Pentagon's recently uncovered project to develop software that allows it to secretly manipulate social media sites to influence Internet conversations and spread propaganda. These suspicious “free Libya” sites all claim to be homegrown, but YOUTUBE and other social media sites cannot be accessed by Internet users in Libya. The “revolution” websites are all in English even though the language of Libya is Arabic, with English rarely spoken and only in the big cities. Despite their dubious origins, professional media groups like CNN, BBC, NBC, CBS, ABC, Fox News, and Al Jazeera have amplified these anonymous and uncorroborated video postings as legitimate news sources.
And some of the “spontaneous” websites are clearly fraudulent. One that calls itself “LIBYAN REVOLUTIONARY CENTRAL” (http://www.feb17.info/) was created on February 14—A DAY BEFORE the original protest. And the website is registered in Ohio as a non-profit organization with a 501c3 tax exempt ID number! CIA √

6a. Whites are desperate for Libyan oil. America and Europe are dependent on the type of oil that is only found in Libya. It is a very high quality “sweet” oil with low sulfur content. Europe's refineries cannot process other types of high sulfur oil, so when Gadhafi recently suggested he could find better customers for Libyan oil in India, China, and Russia, it made Europe desperate for an immediate Libyan “uprising.” CIA √

6b. New oil infrastructure already in place. Only days after the “spontaneous” protests the “rebels,” who were mostly seen in grainy cell phone videos chanting slogans and waving banners, had organized themselves into a sophisticated corporate entity and announced their formation and launching of the “Libyan Oil Company” to supervise oil production for all of Libya, and their creation of the “Central Bank of Benghazi” as a monetary authority. The French government instantaneously recognized these new business entities formed by “the rebels” even though it was still publicly wondering who the rebel leaders were. CIA √

7. CIA history in Libya. The CIA has a LONG documented history of attempts to overthrow Col. Gadhafi. At least four major CIA operations, some in partnership with the Israeli Mossad, have been conducted since 1972. Gadhafi's use of oil revenues to organize and uplift Africa from its colonial destruction is EXACTLY the opposite of America's foreign policy, which has always sought to strip Africa of its raw resources to enrich the multinational corporations. Col. Gadhafi has invested billions of dollars in projects to help emerging African countries become independent. He has worked to establish a “United States of Africa”—an effort to unite Africa to finally overcome the damage caused by centuries of European colonialism. It was Gadhafi who drove the African Union's efforts toward a single African Parliament, a single currency, and a single army. The CIA has no other function than to stop this kind of Black unity and progress. CIA √

8. Libyan invasion planned prior to 9/11. In a 2007 filmed interview, 4-star United States Army Gen. Wesley Clark discussed a Pentagon memo under Donald Rumsfeld that, in his words, “describes how we're going to take out seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran.” CIA √
9. The U.S. companies in Libya are invisible. Many U.S. corporations that have been, are now, and will continue to do business in Libya are UNDER NO PRESSURE to leave or “give back” their profits, or alter their business activity with Gadhafi's so-called “murderous regime.” Curiously, they have achieved a status different from that of The Hon. Min. Louis Farrakhan of the Nation of Islam, which also had a business relationship with Libya—but for comparatively infinitesimal sums. The U.S. companies in Libya whose Libyan business arrangements have yet to be questioned are many, and include:

Chevron Oil
ConocoPhillips
Hess Corporation
Marathon Oil Corporation
Occidental Petroleum
Sheraton Hotels
Exxon Mobil
Dow Chemical
Halliburton
Raytheon
Motorola
Four Seasons Hotels
Shell Oil
United Gulf Construction
Valmont, and White & Case
Marriott Hotels
Intercontinental Hotels

In reality, the CIA works for the multinational corporations to tenaciously protect their world interests. CIA √

10. Rape is charged. A distraught, English-speaking, Arab woman fortuitously finds her way from days of gang rape by Gadhafi's soldiers into the only hotel in Tripoli where foreign journalists are encamped (apparently dropped off by her tormentors) where she reports of her ordeal to the gathered media who immediately, unquestioningly, broadcast the brutal crime to the world as proven fact. She claimed that she was detained at a checkpoint, tied up, abused, then led away to be gang raped—all whilst her assailants were defending Tripoli against a Western bombing campaign. “They defecated and urinated on me and tied me up,” she said, her face streaming with tears. “They violated my honor, look at what the Gadhafi militiamen did to me.”

Everybody who heard this woman's claims—except 100 percent of the Western media—immediately remembered October 1990, when a sobbing 15-year-old Kuwaiti girl gave unsworn testimony in a Congressional hearing chaired by Zionist congressman Thomas Lantos in which she described what she saw in a Kuwaiti hospital with her own eyes: “While I was there, I saw the Iraqi soldiers come into the hospital with guns, and go into the room where … babies were in incubators. They took the babies out of the incubators, took the incubators, and left the babies on the cold floor to die.”

The girl was actually the daughter of a Kuwaiti ambassador, and had been coached by the public relations firm Hill and Knowlton to give false testimony. Three months passed between the hearing and the start of the first Gulf War during which the fabricated incubator story was repeated over and over again by seven U.S. senators and ten times by President G.H.W. Bush himself. It was recited as fact in congressional testimony, on TV and radio talk shows like Nightline, and at the UN Security Council. It is cited as the single most persuasive reason that the American public backed the first Iraq War. None of those involved with the hoax have ever faced legal reprisals. CIA √
The number ten is arbitrary, and does not represent the full extent of possibly the most brazen CIA overthrow attempt in their long and murderous history. That which drives the entire Western industrial infrastructure—petroleum oil—is the only thing on the minds of the charlatan leaders of the West, and the world watches in horrified awe as each blunder they make is exposed to the light in almost real time. The poor Libyan people and their revolutionary African champion Muammar Gadhafi are under severe assault by the very same people who only yesterday assured him he was their partner and friend. It is a 6,000-year-old history of tricks and deceptions that The Most Honorable Elijah Muhammad taught us about, and it has now run its course and is bringing a well-deserved demise to Western rule.