Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

In Memory of the late Col. Muammar Gaddafi - What History Books will NEVER tell your kids about

page: 16
204
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 23 2011 @ 09:53 PM
link   
I have a feeling that Killing Gaddafi was a huge mistake for the US....Other Foreign leaders, especially the ones with nukes are a little bit pissed instead of scared....I wonder when a president from another country will actually be willing to bomb america.....I don't think it is actually a good policy to just take out any foreign leader....Killing presidents of other countries ends up starting wars....I really wonder what will happen of this




posted on Oct, 23 2011 @ 09:57 PM
link   
reply to post by THEDUDE86
 


Ever seen the movie Three Kings?



posted on Oct, 23 2011 @ 10:16 PM
link   
To be fair all round, perhaps the History books should leave out the following;

en.wikipedia.org...

Though it does somehow balance the argument does it not????



posted on Oct, 23 2011 @ 10:26 PM
link   
If the people loved him so much, then why did not hundreds of thousands of peoples there at this rally protect him? That is a really good question. YA THINK MUCH.



posted on Oct, 23 2011 @ 10:29 PM
link   
I just watched a larg amount of cellphone video of the thousands of people protesting, being shot at, and bing killed in the street, all to get gaddafi out of power. You can't fake footage like that, with that many people. He was a brutal SOB to his people, and they hated him, that is the reality.



posted on Oct, 23 2011 @ 11:24 PM
link   
Just remember that although Muammar was not probably a good man, Africa is full of not very good men who lead countries and nato does nothing in those countries except supply arms and displace people for western gains. Also remember that the rebel leader lived in virginia a few miles from the "Farm" for five years, coincidence, I truly doubt it. He, Muammar did what he thought was best for his country and people and had a far bigger vision for the rest of africa, which I sincerely doubt the ptb appreciated. Nato has no mandate to continue to invade soveriegn nations, their member countries houses are far from being in order either. I believe Nostradamus's insights are correct, who is next? Iran? Syria? Why not destabalise the whole area and push us into world war 3. We all know who is sleeping with whom within Nato and who runs nato and the UN, and who benefits? Haliburton, Carlise, Blackwater etc. So what, the troops are coming home from Iraq to regroup for Iran? Who remains? the aforementioned contracters. Rape and pillage is the name of the game. So sad and so sick! When will we, humanity learn that killing begats more killing and all for black gold and golden gold. My 2 cents



posted on Oct, 24 2011 @ 12:34 AM
link   
reply to post by IBelieveInMe
 

still no one has brought forth any proof to show him as a murderous dictator they keep saying he is. the first thing the new regime said they were going to do was bring back the hardcore islamic law. Gadhafi although muslim believed in and made happen more equal rights for women, such as education, equal job oppertunities including government and military jobs. what happens to western people when they bring their ideals to hardcore islamic believers? we get bombed, beheaded and hit with planes. is it really surprising that many people in libya wanted him out when that is the religion of the majority? fractured= you sound so stupid arguing with nothing but sarcastic comebacks please stfu.



posted on Oct, 24 2011 @ 01:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by Redevilfan09
This does not sound like the constitution of a dictator or a country led by a dictator.

www.docstoc.com...

So what did this guy actually do wrong apart from a minority of rebels wanting to oust him? And of course NATO?


Well for one he made political dissent a crime. Speaking about politics with a foreigner was 3 yrs in prison. People who formed political parties were executed. His government conducted public executions and mutilations of political opponents. During the 70s he presided over the executions himself. He ordered numerous assassinations( a couple dozen successful) of overseas critics.

The Libiyan constitution doesn't sound like it belongs to a dictator? The purification laws in 1994? Theft was punished by amputation. Premaritial sex and adultery by public flogging. If your gay you only get 5 yrs in jail.

He openly stated he sponsored terrorist organizations and named quite a few.

I can't even go through all of the mass murders and rapes of civilian protestors he's ordered.

If anyone thinks he's a groovy guy that's your prerogative. I question your judgement. But your opinion is your opinion. But if anyone looks at the facts, just the undisputed ones, it's more than enough to form a reasonable opinion that he's the scum of the earth.



posted on Oct, 24 2011 @ 01:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by nolordbutme
reply to post by IBelieveInMe
 

still no one has brought forth any proof to show him as a murderous dictator they keep saying he is. the first thing the new regime said they were going to do was bring back the hardcore islamic law. Gadhafi although muslim believed in and made happen more equal rights for women, such as education, equal job oppertunities including government and military jobs. what happens to western people when they bring their ideals to hardcore islamic believers? we get bombed, beheaded and hit with planes. is it really surprising that many people in libya wanted him out when that is the religion of the majority? fractured= you sound so stupid arguing with nothing but sarcastic comebacks please stfu.


Are you one of his sons by any chance? 'No evidence'? Only if you keep your eyes closed and fingers jammed in your ears.

Your view of Islam is the usual paranoid western distortion, which posits the most extreme minority who abuse Islam as the majority. That's a lie and even the risk of a theocracy is no reason to let a country remain an undemocratic autocracy. The point is it's the choice of a people how they govern themselves. For better or ill, Islam is the religion at the centre of most arabic cultures, but it has as many variants as Christianity. Deal with it and deal with your ignorance about Islam at the same time.



posted on Oct, 24 2011 @ 02:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by steaming
To be fair all round, perhaps the History books should leave out the following;

en.wikipedia.org...

Though it does somehow balance the argument does it not????


No, it doesn't ... Ghaddafi was stupid, that isn't the question.

What is being said, and what then happened is not the same thing at all. As is said in the bible, "by their actions, thous shalt know them". Not by their words, their promises or rumors.

All of these so called "bad guys", Ghaddafi, Saddam Hussein, that were supposed to be evil and corrupt. Neither went on, nor did they use any force in their wars. Despite the rumors of their weapons of mass destruction, they did not use these. However, the allies have used these same weapons in all of these countries. Renowned for the use of depleted uranium shells, that leave behind radiation sickness, that have caused the deaths of numerous people, as well as caused infants to be born malformed in the thousands.

"By their actions, thou shallt know them"

That Ghaddafi was against the western powers, is well known. That he followed the Soviet, during the soviet times is also well known.

These things, however will not be put into history, but will balance the arguements, won't they?:

Idi Amin was a lunatic, insane, but when he first came to power he was not however. At his original initation, he was welcomed by all western powers, as well as eastern, and Uganda itself. It is a well known fact, that it was Britain that created the atmosphere for the coup, that brought Idi Amin to power, not Ghaddaffi. As is said, power curropts and he became the monster we all know. At the time, when he was the monster ... neither Ghaddafi or anyone else, really supported him.

Idi Amin has more in common with the current rebbels of Lybia, than with the Lybian dictator. He was supported by foreign powers, to get into power. (Britain).

These foreign powers, fought against the Soviet union and brought about the end of it. During the Yougoslavia war, the western powers claimed Serbia was responsible for "ethnic" cleansing. Pictures were in the news papers, of starving prisoners in camp, and made to be similar to pictures from WWII, of starving jews in german camps.

The swedish prime minister, Carl Bildt, went to New York and took the job of being the head on leader on negotiations between the parties in Yougoslavia. His consensus was to NOT make peace. He forced the "soviet" side of the parties, to make deals and then made fun of it being equal to the German deals in lithauen. Made to isolate and destroy their interrests.

This same person, was then the head of Lundin Oil Co. Which is doing it's business in Sudan, and is under endigtment, for forcibly moving hundreds of thousands of people from their homes, including killing numerous. To remove them from the oil fields.

This is the "true" history for you.

And what is most concerning of all these facts, is the one and the biggest factor of all factors. AL QAIDA is fighting side by side, with NATO.

I'm amazed at all the imbecile Americans, that went to war and murdered milions of people because Al Qaida attacked them. Now, you don't hear so much as a single plop ... not a beep, nor a meep.

It's what we call TREASON, in any context imaginable.
edit on 24-10-2011 by bjarneorn because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 24 2011 @ 02:39 AM
link   
post removed for serious violation of ATS Terms & Conditions



posted on Oct, 24 2011 @ 03:41 AM
link   
Great thread OP. I've seen it here for a few days now, but just came to reading it today. This is something everyone should read!! Thank you and S+F.



posted on Oct, 24 2011 @ 04:16 AM
link   
I share the same sentiments as the OP. This is a sad turn in humanity. How can we as a country, not only us the whole UN continue to attempt to police the world we are gonna have some serious karma headed our way for the black gold we seek. Here is an article I found pretty interesting on the subject of Gaddafi.
www.pambazuka.org...
edit on 24-10-2011 by Freetheworld23 because: Updated link



posted on Oct, 24 2011 @ 04:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Gorman91
People don't tend to slaughter you and your family unless your evil.


Again, I disagree with you ...

First of all, to slaughter someone IS EVIL. Saying that EVIL is killing EVIL ... doesn't make any sense. It is a senseless notion, and illogical. It's like a thief, calling someone a thief.

You can drop this "evil" crap now ... it's a load of bull, that is all it is. I don't really care what Ghaddafi did, nor do I care, where he did it or how. I'm not Lybian, he's not my issue ... nor is he YOURS.

OUR issue, is OUR OWN people. It's America and Europe that is doing EVIL. This is the MATTER, YOU AND I, must address. We use weapons of mass destruction, which in and by itself makes us EVIL. We use depleted uranium, and leave radiation behind, causing radiation sickness and mass deaths amongst the nations we fight. THIS MAKES US EVEN MORE EVIL; THAN GADDAFFi.

That is ALL YOU AND I, need to address ... and the fact that you and I, are support Saudi Arabi, the most violent and dictatorial regeme, in the entire world.

WHAT WE DO, is what YOU AND I, need to address.



posted on Oct, 24 2011 @ 05:01 AM
link   
reply to post by Freetheworld23
 


My anti-virus detected malware on the site you linked. Any chance you could provide the content or a synopsis of the article, (with full referencing and source crediting of course!) without the need to click the dodgy link? Thanks.



posted on Oct, 24 2011 @ 05:10 AM
link   
edit on 24-10-2011 by Freetheworld23 because: (no reason given)

Sorry for that it worked fine on my comp. I am new here so I am trying to get this quote source thing correct, by no means did I want you to click on some b.s link my apology. It has great info. I will try and get it up.
edit on 24-10-2011 by Freetheworld23 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 24 2011 @ 05:23 AM
link   
reply to post by teapot
 

This is an Analysis by a Cameroonian writer known as Jean-Paul Pougala . The original analysis was in French and was translated by Sputnik Kilambi. The analysis is divided into 5 parts.
This link should be much better and is the source of the first article on the link I provided sorry.


www.pambazuka.org...



posted on Oct, 24 2011 @ 08:12 AM
link   
reply to post by Mr.Jcury
 


I wanted so badly to be able to decide what to believe, after reading different news reports I couldn't decide what to trust. I do believe that first hand knowledge of a situation is the only way to know what the truth is anymore as we are fed so much propaganda from reports in the media and on the internet. Thanks for taking the time to post your experience in the country of Libya and what you were told by the people.
This I can believe



posted on Oct, 24 2011 @ 08:38 AM
link   
reply to post by Freetheworld23
 


I found a very interesting point in your link, thanks for posting!

www.pambazuka.org...

The question that anyone with even minimum intelligence cannot help asking is the following: Are countries like France, England, the USA, Italy, Norway, Denmark, Poland who defend their right to bomb Libya on the strength of their self proclaimed democratic status really democratic? If yes, are they more democratic than Gaddafi’s Libya? The answer in fact is a resounding NO, for the plain and simple reason that democracy doesn’t exist. This isn’t a personal opinion, but a quote from someone whose native town Geneva, hosts the bulk of UN institutions. The quote is from Jean Jacques Rousseau, born in Geneva in 1712 and who writes in chapter four of the third book of the famous ‘Social Contract’ that ‘there never was a true democracy and there never will be.’

Rousseau sets out the following four conditions for a country to be labelled a democracy and according to these Gaddafi’s Libya is far more democratic than the USA, France and the others claiming to export democracy:

1. The State: The bigger a country, the less democratic it can be. According to Rousseau, the state has to be extremely small so that people can come together and know each other. Before asking people to vote, one must ensure that everybody knows everyone else, otherwise voting will be an act without any democratic basis, a simulacrum of democracy to elect a dictator.

2. Simplicity in customs and behavioural patterns are also essential if one is to avoid spending the bulk of the time debating legal and judicial procedures in order to deal with the multitude of conflicts of interest inevitable in a large and complex society. Western countries define themselves as civilised nations with a more complex social structure whereas Libya is described as a primitive country with a simple set of customs. This aspect too indicates that Libya responds better to Rousseau’s democratic criteria than all those trying to give lessons in democracy. Conflicts in complex societies are most often won by those with more power, which is why the rich manage to avoid prison because they can afford to hire top lawyers and instead arrange for state repression to be directed against someone one who stole a banana in a supermarket rather than a financial criminal who ruined a bank. In the city of New York for example where 75 per cent of the population is white, 80 per cent of management posts are occupied by whites who make up only 20 per cent of incarcerated people.

3. Equality in status and wealth: A look at the Forbes 2010 list shows who the richest people in each of the countries currently bombing Libya are and the difference between them and those who earn the lowest salaries in those nations; a similar exercise on Libya will reveal that in terms of wealth distribution, Libya has much more to teach than those fighting it now, and not the contrary. So here too, using Rousseau’s criteria, Libya is more democratic than the nations pompously pretending to bring democracy. In the USA, 5 per cent of the population owns 60 per cent of the national wealth, making it the most unequal and unbalanced society in the world.

4. No luxuries: according to Rousseau there can’t be any luxury if there is to be democracy. Luxury, he says, makes wealth a necessity which then becomes a virtue in itself, it, and not the welfare of the people becomes the goal to be reached at all cost, ‘Luxury corrupts both the rich and the poor, the one through possession and the other through envy; it makes the nation soft and prey to vanity; it distances people from the State and enslaves them, making them a slave to opinion.’

Free electricity, No interest on loans, 50,000 for 1st home to married couples, everything you need to farm, .14 cent gasoline... all of these would be luxuries to most Americans these days, however in reality they are not. Those that have 5 homes each of which cost more than 2.5 million would not like the idea of a society with no "luxuries" but I believe most Americans would consider these basic needs something to look forward to at this point.

edit on 24-10-2011 by shell69 because: to include the link



posted on Oct, 24 2011 @ 09:27 AM
link   
reply to post by PuterMan
 


Thanks for that, for someone like myself who is trying so hard to figure out what the truth is today, one post saying this was all propoganda stops me dead in my tracks, and just when I was about to form an opinion!
I choose to ignore anything that is not backed up by hard core facts supporting that statement!





new topics

top topics



 
204
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join