Islam to be main source of legislation in post-Qaddafi Libya

reply to post by Xcathdra


Did I mention oil.

But didn't they call for a central bank REAL fast?

Originally posted by backinblack

All they want is control of the assets and don't care how many die to get them..

So when you said this you were referring to what, strategic sand reserves? Precious metals? Strategic metals?

Please clarify what you were referring to about resources.

As far as the Central Bank goes, we are in agreement there, and Agent and I are one in the same when reference to the ICC ignoring their own charter and rules.

As I said before, you guys are making leaps of logic and the revolution is not even overwith yet.

reply to post by Xcathdra


Yes it's not technically a part of the middle east however that phrase seems to be a commonly used catch phrase to describe the cultural and linguistic influence of the middle east into both North Africa and Central Asia which is why I used that term to describe Libya.

Originally posted by Xcathdra

Originally posted by backinblack

All they want is control of the assets and don't care how many die to get them..

So when you said this you were referring to what, strategic sand reserves? Precious metals? Strategic metals?

Please clarify what you were referring to about resources.

As far as the Central Bank goes, we are in agreement there, and Agent and I are one in the same when reference to the ICC ignoring their own charter and rules.

As I said before, you guys are making leaps of logic and the revolution is not even overwith yet.

edit on 14-9-2011 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)

I never even mentioned resources..
I said "assets"..
That includes many things including banking etc..

Please read more carefully rather than merely assuming you know what I'm thinking.

Originally posted by lifeissacred
reply to post by Xcathdra

 

Yes it's not technically a part of the middle east however that phrase seems to be a commonly used catch phrase to describe the cultural and linguistic influence of the middle east into both North Africa and Central Asia which is why I used that term to describe Libya.

Understandable, but when comparing accomplishments of the countries, its makes a huge difference in terms of ranking, living standards etc. Libya was one of the top ranked nations in Africa, and was above a few Middle East countries.

Either or, like I said not trying to be a jerk. Just want credit to go where credit is deserved.

reply to post by backinblack


Which is why I asked you to clarify since your initial post left room for interpretation. Question though, what "assets" are you refering to? Naming banks also leaves room for interpretation (are you referring to the physical bank, or whats in it). Are you reffering to seized bank assets by foriegn countries?

If you can do me a favor and be a bit more concise so I dont have to interpret it would be appreciated so we dont derail the thread to much.

reply to post by Xcathdra


No I will not derail the thread..
But you know the scenario.
It's already being played out in Iraq and Afghanistan..

reply to post by Xcathdra


Libyan revolution was Al Qaeda based .fact.

and you support Al qaeda by supporting the fake revolution.So , please neocon I am sick of your wars and false flags like 9/11 and Oklahoma which involved mass murder of innocents by the govt and then scapegoating others.

so go and shove your NATO corporate BS elsewhere .

reply to post by ludwigvonmises003


The only real tangible link to Al Qaeda or similar fundamentalist movements was the LIFG who are a minority within the different factions of the Libyan rebel movement. Libya is a big country, I seriously doubt the LIFG could coordinate so many people who share their ideology, what happened in Libya was a spontaneous uprising in line with the other mass protests across the Arab world and North Africa, many people on ATS seem to have forgotten the riots that started it all and how protesters were being gunned down in the streets.

Libyan Islamic Fighting Group

The group has denied ever being affiliated with al-Qaeda, stating that it refused to join the global Islamic front Osama bin Laden declared against the west in 1998.

Originally posted by ludwigvonmises003
reply to post by Xcathdra

 

Libyan revolution was Al Qaeda based .fact.

and you support Al qaeda by supporting the fake revolution.So , please neocon I am sick of your wars and false flags like 9/11 and Oklahoma which involved mass murder of innocents by the govt and then scapegoating others.

so go and shove your NATO corporate BS elsewhere .

Im good....

How exactly does one tell if a person is a member of Al Queida? Are you suggesting that every single Libyan involved in the revolution are members of Al Queida? If so, source please.

How is it a fake revolution? Care to share your sources of info that discuss that topic?

You've never met me, so labeling me a Neocon is about as intelligent as me labeling you an unintelligent muslim who is stuck in the 9th century. How about we debate the ideas instead of the name calling, or is that to much to ask? I know difering thoughts and ideas are generally frowned upon in other parts of the world, but not here (hmm, I labeled you again... sorry).

Spin the 9/11 paranoia all you want, but please do it in a different thread so this one doesnt get derailed.
Spin the Oklahoma City incident all you want, but please do it in a different thread so this one doesnt get derailed.

Not sure where you get NATO as a corporation, and since they are invovled in Libya please exaplin what you mean.

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by Xcathdra

 

No I will not derail the thread..
But you know the scenario.
It's already being played out in Iraq and Afghanistan..

No I was referring to the asset seizure, which is in line with the topic since its government / TNC related. I just didnt want to get bogged down in super details. I was just wondering what type of assets you were talking about? I am assuming it involves the Gold / seized overseas assets. If thats the case we can move on (I just wanted clarification on what you were referring to).

If its something else, what is it your referencing?

Originally posted by lifeissacred
reply to post by ludwigvonmises003

 

The only real tangible link to Al Qaeda or similar fundamentalist movements was the LIFG who are a minority within the different factions of the Libyan rebel movement. Libya is a big country, I seriously doubt the LIFG could coordinate so many people who share their ideology, what happened in Libya was a spontaneous uprising in line with the other mass protests across the Arab world and North Africa, many people on ATS seem to have forgotten the riots that started it all and how protesters were being gunned down in the streets.

Libyan Islamic Fighting Group

The group has denied ever being affiliated with al-Qaeda, stating that it refused to join the global Islamic front Osama bin Laden declared against the west in 1998.

edit on 14-9-2011 by lifeissacred because: (no reason given)

My first post touched on that group and they have made some interesting statements and followed up with actions, so im curious how that group will play out in all of this.

Fears over Islamists within Libyan rebel ranks

But neither arrogance nor vengeance dominated Mr Belhaj's victory speech to the rebels in Tripoli. Instead, he called on Libyans to safeguard public property, end their vendettas and build a new Libya.

The moderate tone is generally consistent with what most LIFG leaders have been saying in the last six months, whether in eastern or western Libya. It seems their experiences in armed conflicts in Afghanistan, Libya and Algeria have forced them to mature politically, re-calculate strategically, and moderate their behaviour and ideology.

The former "fighting group" has even toned down its name, becoming the Islamic Movement for Change.

Thats a group to watch to see how its members react to the changes / ideology shift.

reply to post by Xcathdra


muslim

Ex-american citizen and constitutionalist patriot ,yes.

check globalresearch or any independent outlet.
check telegraph's initial reports on the commanders ,Al Qaeda.
www.atimes.com...
rt.com...

and yes Oklahoma opened my eyes,neocon.So ,I don't need your corporate BS. When 9/11 happened,I realized there was no going back and left USA.

Originally posted by ludwigvonmises003
Ex-american citizen and constitutionalist patriot ,yes.

yeah its called sarcasm..........

So when the going got tough, you got going? Its always easier to throw rocks from the outside, than it is to remain inside and fix it from there.

Whats your theory on Libya then and NATO involvement?

reply to post by Xcathdra


considering the spiral of USA to fascism yes,it would be better to leave this corporate fascist empire ,rather than paying my taxes to this monster.YES ,PAYING MY TAXES.

Yes,by paying taxes you support the monster.I don't support the monster neocon.oh i forgot you neocons are the fascists and are the precise reason why our beloved nation became a monster in all forms.
military in the imperialism,false flags and genocides.
financial in the form of uber big govt.excessive taxes and crony capitalism
social in the form of moral bankruptcy,the reality tv generation sissy ,make up boys generation and social welfare queen generation.

I think it's important to point out that criticism of the rebel movement should be kept seperate from criticism of NATO involvement. Of course we in NATO alligned countries are involved for our own reasons, seeking allies in the region etc. However, so many people are attempting to portray the rebel movement in Libya as solely involved with NATO's aims when both sides have their own reasons for wanting Gaddafi out of power.

Both NATO and the rebels should be scrutinised and criticised, however to view the rebels as a NATO force etc is in my opinion incorrect.

Originally posted by lifeissacred
I think it's important to point out that criticism of the rebel movement should be kept seperate from criticism of NATO involvement. Of course we in NATO alligned countries are involved for our own reasons, seeking allies in the region etc. However, so many people are attempting to portray the rebel movement in Libya as solely involved with NATO's aims when both sides have their own reasons for wanting Gaddafi out of power.

Thats pretty much the basis of my argument as well. Its being approached as an all or nothing mentality by some, without anything to back it up.

I also fail to understand why its apparently impossible in the eyes of some for Al Queida / terror / rebel / whatever groups to actually change themselves / mandate / etc.

I just get the impression that people think its impossible for people in the Middle East to change their government. Blaming the West, to me imo, is because its hard for some people to accept that people would reject the status quo / religous influence in certain aspects of their life.

I see Islam slowly being dragged into the 21st century, just as other religions have done throughout their existance, when social norms change. I think the concept of a modern Islam / some type of democratic style government scares the older generations.

reply to post by ludwigvonmises003


When you get back around to answering the on topic questions let me know. Other than that feel free to rant to yourself.

Benghazi is known as the most islamist location in Libya and a centre of human trafficking.

Those of us with ideals and beliefs should take time to ponder the situation again or let time pass and see what happens before defending the undefensible.

This is not a case of standing up for Gaddafi, the world is not black and white.

reply to post by Xcathdra


IMO the majority of military intervention is for the benefit of Big Corporations..

It has little to do with anything else..

It's a sad truth but one that is becoming clearer by the day.

reply to post by backinblack


Question - If its done for big business, how do you acount for wars that dont involve a western country? If you perceive a difference, what do you see as the difference?