Countdown to Invasion; Libya's Neighborhoods Prepare for NATO's Boots

page: 5
14
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 5 2011 @ 12:15 PM
link   
reply to post by xavi1000
 


No Xavi I am informed, in fact I’ve seen all of those videos already I just haven’t come to the same conclusions. You on the other I’m not so sure considering that I’ve already addressed at least one of those videos in this very thread.

That said...

The first video has nothing to do with anything that I have said, the fact that Gaddafi has apologised for the Arab slave trade for example is irrelevant to the claim that NATO has intervened to stop Libya trading oil in a different currency (which is what I was talking about). However I will point out that the credibility of that video is questionable, for example try finding any credible source that proves that Libyan oil revenue ever went directly into the bank accounts ordinary Libyans; it didn’t, it was in fact a pie in the sky “promise” that never actually happened. I’m not saying it’s all untrue but I wouldn’t take it on faith.

The second video along with the fourth have already been dealt with in my second and third post on page four. As I said then there are no other sources for this claim that Libya was going to move over to a new currency. The only mention of this is in these two videos and they come after the rebellion began; if it was true that Libya was going to switch over then it would have been huge news. There is also no information that I can find on the two conferences that Dr Thring mentions, even “loves_a_conspiracy” admitted this point. It is also very strange that the Dr claims that these plans stem from 1996 yet the US has done nothing until now, even becoming very friendly with Gaddafi in the intervening period. In contrast it was less than three years between Iraq mooting the possibility of moving to the Euro and the US invasion. This theory is unsupported and doesn’t even make sense.

I can’t see what the third video has to do with claim that Libya was going to switch currencies or why France would agree to cover the US.

Again, the fifth video has no evidence for any of the claims made about Libya.

With regard the sixth video of Wesley Clark, it doesn’t actually contract anything I’ve said. The US wanted and wants rid of Gaddafi which exactly what I said, they’re taking this opportunity to remove someone they don’t want around.

Similarly what does the Rebel/Al Qaeda link have to do with anything that I have said? Or the fact that the CIA is liaising with the rebels or helping in the airstrikes, I’m not denying that NATO is at war with Libya!

And video seven, what has it got to do with what I have said? It’s just reiterating the fact that there is a conflict going on there. I’m not questioning whether or not Libya is a good idea only the claim that this is about oil or currencies.

On the issue of water and the man made river; what are you suggesting?

To be honest that post just seems as though you’ve posted a wall of text in the hope I’d give up.

Deal with what I’ve said not all this irrelevant window dressing.

reply to post by jude11
 



If America had nothing to do with going into Libya


That was not the question.

One poster made the claim that:


This whole invasion is because yet another country wanted to sell its own oil in the currency of their choice. Anytime ANY country tries to change the currency away from the american dollar they are attacked


Someone else pointed out that it was France and the UK who took the lead in calling for action against Gaddafi to which you said:


All for the news my friend.

People are tired of US invasions so put others in front while being supported by the US from behind and you have a US invasion portrayed as non involvement, Nice huh?


I want to know, and what I asked, was why would France go along with providing a front for US gain?

You are answering the question “why isn’t the US involved” which was never asked.


As for Iraq, with BP getting contracts and being held by approx. 39% US share holders (At that time, I don't know about now) it's easy to see where the product will flow.


So the US went to war so that a foreign company, in partnership with a Chinese oil firm, with a minority US investor base could get some of the oil contracts as part of a larger consortium?




posted on Jul, 5 2011 @ 01:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Mike_A
 


You said you not discount that this war is for humanitarian reason ...give me proof that Gaddafi bombed civilians with planes . You already saw how NATO is killing students and children in Libya

NATO attacks Libyan University
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Libyan children killed by NATO bombs

www.abovetopsecret.com...


“Airstrikes in Libya did not take place” – Russian military


The reports of Libya mobilizing its air force against its own people spread quickly around the world. However, Russia's military chiefs say they have been monitoring from space – and the pictures tell a different story. ­According to Al Jazeera and BBC, on February 22 Libyan government inflicted airstrikes on Benghazi – the country’s largest city – and on the capital Tripoli. However, the Russian military, monitoring the unrest via satellite from the very beginning, says nothing of the sort was going on on the ground.


Gaddafi is not a flower . but i dont see dictator often with this kind of measures

* GDP per capita - $ 14,192.
* Unemployment benefit - $ 730.
* Each family member subsidized by the state gets annually $ 1.000
* Salary for nurses - $ 1.000.
* For every newborn is paid $ 7.000.
* The bride and groom receive a $ 64 thousand to purchase flats.
* Major taxes and levies prohibited.
* To open a personal business a one-time financial assistance of $ 20.000
* Education and medicine are free.
* Educ.Internships abroad - at government expense.
* Stores for large families with symbolic prices for basic foodstuffs.
* Part of pharmacies - with free dispensing.
* Loans for buying a car and an apartment - no interest.
* Real estate services are prohibited.,
* Buying a car up to 50% paid by the State.
* No Payment for electricity for the population.
* Sales and use of alcohol is prohibited.
* Petrol is cheaper than water. 1 liter of gasoline - $ 0.14.

And post from Dario

1) Amount of support he still has in Libya.
2) Number of foreign workers that found workplace in Libya. I read in one article that number was above 1,5 million which is a lot if you keep in mind that population of Libya is about 6,5 million. I even remember first news when war in Libya started. They were about workers waiting for help and transportation to their homeland. So if there is no freedom of speech, religion and so on (that's what your link claims) why did all these people chose to move to Libya and work there?
3) Projects he did in Libya (man made river, schools, housing...). Today Libya in one of the richest countries in Africa. GDP per capita was $14,880 in 2010 which is, for example, higher then in Romania and Bulgaria (both joined European Union).
4) And guess what. Main export countries are/were Italy,Germany, France and Spain. Same countries that now started attack on Libya or they help NATO in their mission there.

Anyway, what i want to say is that i know he isn't a saint but i don't think he is as bad as mainstream media shows him.

Also when he helps terrorist groups he is criminal but when "west" does the same thing then it is ok?
I don't want to approve his crimes because others do it to i just think there should be same standards for all world leaders. And if same standards would be applied then Gaddafi just might be a better leader then some "west" leaders.


And 8th video

edit on 5-7-2011 by xavi1000 because: (no reason given)
edit on 5-7-2011 by xavi1000 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 5 2011 @ 04:13 PM
link   
Sorry, you keep changing the subject and ignoring everything I have said. What about you answer my criticisms of the oil currency theory, tell me what 90% of your last post had to do with what I have said, or what your last video has to do with what I’ve said.

You keep answering points that I have not made; where did I say that Gaddafi had bombed civilians with planes?

I don’t know or claim to know the exact reasons for the intervention, I am only saying what I can see are not the reasons.



posted on Jul, 5 2011 @ 04:52 PM
link   
By the way if you want evidence of human rights abuses by Gaddafi the following are document cases by the Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International and one report from Reporters Without Borders. These are all independent, international groups that have been critical of NATO forces and western media. I also picked out only those cases that were actually verified by the group in question, none of this contains second hand reporting.

www.hrw.org...

www.hrw.org...

www.hrw.org...

www.hrw.org...

www.hrw.org...

www.hrw.org...

www.hrw.org...

www.hrw.org...

www.hrw.org...

en.rsf.org...

www.amnesty.org.uk...

www.amnesty.org.uk...

www.amnesty.org.uk...

www.amnesty.org.uk...

www.amnesty.org.uk...

www.amnesty.org.uk...

www.amnesty.org.uk...

No mention of planes though, so maybe that makes it all ok.



posted on Jul, 5 2011 @ 05:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mike_A
By the way if you want evidence of human rights abuses by Gaddafi the following are document cases by the Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International and one report from Reporters Without Borders. These are all independent, international groups that have been critical of NATO forces and western media. I also picked out only those cases that were actually verified by the group in question, none of this contains second hand reporting.

www.hrw.org...

www.hrw.org...

www.hrw.org...

www.hrw.org...

www.hrw.org...

www.hrw.org...

www.hrw.org...

www.hrw.org...

www.hrw.org...

en.rsf.org...

www.amnesty.org.uk...

www.amnesty.org.uk...

www.amnesty.org.uk...

www.amnesty.org.uk...

www.amnesty.org.uk...

www.amnesty.org.uk...

www.amnesty.org.uk...

No mention of planes though, so maybe that makes it all ok.


Thanks. I'm be needing to use it against pro-Gadadfai supporters.



posted on Jul, 5 2011 @ 05:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Mike_A
 


I dont denying this evidence and i dont think Gaddafi is flower ...but you dont solving war with war



posted on Jul, 5 2011 @ 05:55 PM
link   
We, that is the NATO criminals, are not trying to take out Ghaddafi because of human rights violations. As was mentioned above, you don't kill innocent men, women, and children because of human rights violations.
In fact, it should be noted that NATO countries are far worse.
There is a thread here that discussed the tactics used to manipulate our minds. I see at least one used here, and that is that you don't have to be a pro Ghaddafi supporter to think NATO is guilty of criminal invasion.



posted on Jul, 5 2011 @ 06:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by xavi1000
reply to post by Mike_A
 


I dont denying this evidence and i dont think Gaddafi is flower ...but you dont solving war with war


Well that's how reality is. Talking sometimes isn't going to help. During the 1st Gulf War, the UN tried to talk to Saddam into taking his army out of Kuwait 6 months(When Saddam invaded Kuwait in August of 1990) which he didn't. Sometimes violent action are needed to take action. Plus Iraqi troops were raping women and looting all the resources in Kuwait. Since Saddam refuse to budge out of Kuwait, violent action led by UN-led forces are taken. Guess what, we kicked Saddam out of Kuwait and peace there has been restored.

Same with Kosovo war, the UN and NATO tried to talk to Milošević Army to stop ethic cleansing and killing all the Bosnian Muslims and Albanians in Kosovo which would force them to move into other neighboring countries(A country cannot push a minority they don't want across the borders into other countries as it would have destabilised several poor countries in the Balkans such as Albania and Macedonia), he refuse time and time again. So NATO decided to bomb them into hoping it would stop them from killing all the Albanians and Bosnian Muslims. It did pressure Milošević into stop fighting.
Sometimes war is necessary to be taken in order for them to stop the conflict.
edit on 5-7-2011 by Paulioetc15 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 5 2011 @ 06:33 PM
link   
reply to post by xavi1000
 



I dont denying this evidence and i dont think Gaddafi is flower ...but you dont solving war with war


What does that have to do with anything that I have said?

Our whole interaction in this thread stems from your suggestion that France willingly took the spotlight off the US because Gaddafi had funded Sarkozy’s election campaign. I made two criticisms of that suggestion.

Since then you have said the intervention was not for humanitarian reasons, told me I’m not very well informed, posted about Libya’s standard of living, repeated the claim that I have already addressed about the alleged currency switch, posted about how banks made money from Libya, talked about how the rebels have links with Al Qaeda, said that the CIA has been operating in Libya, reposted reams of text from other peoples threads, posted something about the man made river project but not said why, linked to a thread about how Britain has frozen Libyan assets, claimed that Reuters has faked their reports, linked to a documentary about Henry Kissinger, posted an article from 2007 with the claim that some pharmaceutical company wants to depopulate Africa, posted a video of a pro Gaddafi demonstration, reposted more threads about NATO killing civilians and now made some philosophical point about how two wrongs don’t make a right; but not once have you actually addressed my criticisms of the theory that France willingly took the spotlight off the US because Gaddafi had funded Sarkozy’s election campaign.



posted on Jul, 5 2011 @ 06:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Mike_A
 


Hehe , nice post

But you missed this " Maybe beacause of this " ,i never claimed that as a fact.
www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Jul, 5 2011 @ 06:48 PM
link   
reply to post by xavi1000
 


Yet again you seem unable to respond to what I have actually written, if you want to play the pedantic filibuster and get hung up on semantics what I actually said in that last post was;


Our whole interaction in this thread stems from your suggestion that France willingly took the spotlight off the US because Gaddafi had funded Sarkozy’s election campaign.


Not that it matters but I never actually said that you claimed it to be a diehard fact, nevertheless whether a claim of fact or a suggested possibility it doesn’t mean that it is immune to criticism.

Do you have anything to add that is actually relevant to anything that I have posted?



posted on Jul, 5 2011 @ 06:51 PM
link   
reply to post by xavi1000
 


Thanks so much for your post!!! What a gold mine of information! Please keep it coming. I especially appreciate all the web links- I didn't know about many of these sites. Star for you.





new topics
top topics
 
14
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join