UPDATE: Gaddafi killed, died of wounds - NTC

Originally posted by Aeons
Go look yourself.

I am unconcerned with details that now don't matter.

What matters now is that Islamists have removed a democratic government to install their own in Tunisia. That the entire Maghreb is in the process of a mass take over by the same group that just took over Libya.

Look at what is happening NOW. It requires your concern more than the dead man does.

Sadly your qutie right

Originally posted by Aeons
reply to post by SecondAmendmentUser

 

You throw your net so wide, that you catch nothing of use.

Really,

The other shoe WILL eventually drop, every terrorist (or terrorist state) has their day hopefully the occupied US gov't will have its day come soon.

The day the last elite/ zionist/bankster is drop kicked from their postions of power here in the US is the day the USA can once again become a country to be admired and respected.

Originally posted by Aeons

He was one serious badass mofo if he survived that slug in the temple, to be killed by shots to the legs and stomach.

Or......he got shot in the stomach first.........and was shot in the temple at a latter stage.......when dying or already dead perhaps?

But he seemed admirable to have left the country to be exploited by the US / Europe in the past, have given the empowerment of women in society (considering North African culture and its proximity to the Middle East), even if it was a country that took independence of Italy, which suggests that it has spread European values ​​in the culture. Also by providing free electricity to everyone even though conditions may be favorable to that offer.

But the main thing was he saved the country from exploitation in the past Let us return to the history books:

1. All countries that have joined or opened to the American capital / European (The "terrible monster") did well. See Japan and Germany / Europe after the war had all but closed to opened their doors to Americans, and the "terrible monster" destroyed these people '.

Answer: No, they continue with their democracies, free countries, particularly filled with technology and very rich.

2. All countries that have adopted the ultra-nationalist mimimi, sat down to cry and protest and joined to the shaft or any other chorãozinho and did very poorly, this includes China, India, nearly all of Africa, Arabs and the entire block the Soviet Union. After passing the hat had to ask for alms and return humiliated their origins, which should never have left. And now so are developing.

3. All countries that were "on the fence," and neither here nor there, such as Brazil and many others have lost the tram development of history and are now trying to return to their development with open borders. It has some "terrible monster" in threatening and devouring '.

Answer: No, this "terrible monster" produce wealth, welfare, development and jobs in these countries. Took our oil, our gold and our Amazon. No, but smart people took advantage of these speeches to grab votes and wealth, then who stole more and did not return anything, our wise guys or this "terrible monster"?.

GLOBAL ELITE, SHE wants to overthrow nationalist governments to create multiple ECONOMIC BLOCKS AROUND THE WORLD FOR THE INSTALLATION OF THE NEW WORLD ORDER

GO TO FIGHT BROTHERS

reply to post by Logical one


Hmmm. I guess that the mob could be so stupid that they would execution style shoot in the temple someone already dead. They could be that dumb.

reply to post by carlitomoore


How convenient for whoever's been giving him financial aid to fight to the death and drag this out! Since BP has maintained Gaddafi in power through through petro-dollars - very good for BP - very bad for Libiya - they would be the ones that stood to lose the most, though somehow I doubt this will be the case. I'm sure BP is busy already preparing the next fascist regieme. Ain't globalization grand!?!?

Originally posted by D377MC
I find it interesting that you feel the need to defend the mainstream media, but hey, whatever works better than sleeping pills for you.

I don't recall the video being mainstream media. I recall it as a video that broke on the net.

I don't even watch MSM anymore; not since I started real academic training on international politics anyways. So eat your little heart out.

Originally posted by D377MC

You have to be an insuperable fool to lend any credence whatsoever to anything you hear or read in the mainstream media and newspapers.

edit on 21-10-2011 by D377MC because: (no reason given)

Whilst I agree you have to treat any official accounts with caution.......by the same token you would also be foolish to lend any credence to every crack pot conspiracy theory perpetuated on the net......If you did then you would be led to believe that Michael Jackson was living it up with Elvis in outer Mongolia somewhere.

Originally posted by Aeons
reply to post by fleabit

 

The dictator was a bad man, who did bad things.

Giving Northern Africa to Islamists to kick off the Islamist Empire wasn't The Solution to it.

But its okay if the US does. Double standard dont you think.

Originally posted by ImmortalThought

Originally posted by Aeons
reply to post by fleabit

 

The dictator was a bad man, who did bad things.

Giving Northern Africa to Islamists to kick off the Islamist Empire wasn't The Solution to it.

But its okay if the US does. Double standard dont you think.

I don't understand your statement.

Yes, if your interests are at stake and there is not a better way then your country may have a good reason to do this.

However, what does your country get out of this? How does this benefit you?

We've been told this is about democracy building, but these are not real democracies. Tunisia just had their elected government removed.

So it isn't really democracy building.

There was no security risk from them, and in many ways far less than the security risks presented by others.

It doesn't have any tangible benefit for you.

I would actually suggest that this action makes the security of subsequent generations far less secure.

There were other options. Of which would have been less bloody and provided security through-out along with good relations with other African nations.

It clearly annexes an entire area of trade routes, and makes them less secure, and then later more secure but owned by a series of Islamist countries who have intent to use that security and those resources to pursue an expansionist empire.

Frankly, from my analysis, several NATO leaders just got had. Someone just played the Israelis hard and fast, and seem to have set them up.

Yes, the USA could do this. You should remember that this mission was headed out of Europe who apparently didn't have what it took to do it. But this isn't in your interests.

Originally posted by TinfoilTP
Since the OWS nutters link themselves to the Arab Spring movement, they too cast Ghadaffi as an evil dictator that had to go, along with the very free world establishment they are against which says the very same thing.

Ghaddaffi was good for one thing, proving all of you Ghadaffi supporters in this thread are not part of the 99% or the 1%......hahahaha you don't exist.

You cannot be a Ghadaffi loyalist and an OWS supporter, it is an impossibillity. The only other alternative is an establishment backer, and again no room for Ghadaffi loyalists there either.

Don't blame me, the OWS crowd defined the division of with them or against them, and Ghadaffi was an enemy of both.

Dude...are you serious? What makes you so sure of that huh?

I'm a OWS supporter, and guess what, I'm a "loyalist". In fact, I do not respect NATO at all for what they have do to Libya. Gaddafi was the voice of the country, and to me he was a really great freedom fighter. I have read his book and was heavily satisfied!

I'm part of the Occupy movement as well. I've been to Occupy Montreal tonight, which is connected to the whole Occupy global movement, including Wall Street. Let me tell you, I've seen a lot of people who were disgusted at Gaddafi's death. There actually was a speaker who talked about Gaddafi for like 30 minutes, how NATO killed him because he was actually to free Africa from the West. Then the following speaker talked about the Rothschild, central banking, and fractional economy. Anonymous was there giving a great hand on logistics, and gifted the 260 tents wide camp a free WIFI connection so everybody there can connect within each others and with the world.

I'm pretty sure this is the same reality in New-York, because I know the goals are common! So yeah...I kind of disagree with you.

Why didnt they parade Bin Ladens death all over the world with footage? Simply, because it is hard to see a friend go. But, not an enemy. Everybody Wake Up Please.
Hypocrisy in mainstream media prevails again. You fother muckers will get yours eventually. All despots do.
I certainly wont miss gaddafi. But i assure you not a single person will be happy with his predecesor.

reply to post by TheSandMansExecutioner

Eventually they did;
thelede.blogs.nytimes.com...

Im surprised , i tought he had plans for this kind of situations from day one .

An eye for an eye makes the whole world go blind. Just sayin'

reply to post by nightstalker78

Originally posted by nightstalker78

Originally posted by tooo many pills
Funny how we've already seen bloody videos and pics on TV of Gaddafi within hours of his death...

*Cough* Osama

Difference is,Americans are civilized. We don't drag dead bodies through the streets for everyone to see. Yeah,you know I'm right. Flame away.

We didn't need to drag Osama's body through the street or show his last gasps of air. We needed to prove to the world that he actually died... One simple, unedited photo could have done just that.

The hand of course WESTERN who pulled the trigger during the arrest of Libyan dictator Muammar Qaddafi appears mysteriously amid the roar of the crowd and does the dirty work, without a trace. A secret agent infiltrates performs over a burning file, by using a particularly potent weapon. In the confusion no one notices the thing. And if after all, who would go there to care much about that? After that, the official apology (rigged, of course) is that "the dictator would have been reached during a confrontation between rebel forces and supporters of their cause" - which did not really exist, since the images are very clear. Yeah! Something not too surprising - since that's exactly how the thing works