OMG that is the same one who sodimized gaddaf with the knife.. Not only did he raped him with the knife he shot him in the head and chest

At this point of time, anyone can claim anything, just for publicity sake, even if he was not personally beside the beast.

By all means, let 'due process' take its course, since our fellow human libyan brothers and sisters have a willing confessor to be put on trial, for the 'murder' of the beast had never been solicitated by the Rebel Counci unless live capture was impossible.

But then, right now, the Rebel Council have a HELL lotta on its hands than to care about the beast, and rightfully it should take the last priority on the list of the sovereign people's well being. There can never be anything more important than the welfare of the People, more so after decades under the beast's rule, and the immense sufferings of the recent months caused by his belligerance.

Not many mothers whom had lost their sons in the struggle for freedom and nationhood will now care about the dead beast.

My initial reaction to things like this is "it's just wrong", that said, I understand the impact this can have in a positive way. Tyrants everywhere took notice of this I promise you, and while it may or may not cause any of them to change their ways, it might just give them pause somewhere down the line and if that saves just a few lives from death or worse (to me torture is worse) then I would say it's justified.

It's a slippery slope for sure and I still have mixed feelings about it, there is evidence to support he was an evil monster and also that he was a pretty good leader, I know that is what matters to most, but I would look more at the end result. If it accomplishes nothing, and more importantly will not hurt anything in the future by keeping him alive, I'd probably put him the same cells he put others in. By killing him, you do eliminate any chance of a return or escape.

It was probably just to tempting for an angry young man.

Don't allow your brains to be addled by this. It is already known that at least one 'bodyguard' was already executed by decapitation in the tunnel, (no comparison to a bullet) it is not known who did that, but it was wrong, and just as wrong as any other summary execution as performed by military, why was that bodyguard not dispatched by a bullet, most of the rest were. Why the Gaddafi ring trophy? why the bodily mutilation after death? while all our voted, yes voted in, F..up's in our (civilised) governments turn a blind eye to the horror enough to say that a bad man has gone and we're better off, (no mention that 'he' has gone to a better existence) neither do they say that the rule of law has prevailed in the same breath. Thank you god so bloody much. Most of all, how long does it take for the 'Will of Allah' to run out, obviously in this case, 40 odd years, in Egypt's case a few bullets flying around there more than once, and their recent leaders having lived and died, Secus Non Secus. Does it not say to you there is something not quite right here?

Originally posted by Skewed

Have you seen refutable proof to the otherwise? That aside.

Wrong my friend. Someone is innocent until proven guilty. It is up to the Gaddafi bashers to prove he is.

You shot an old, unarmed man who had already been beaten to a pulp by a gang of thugs...

Wow, you're one tough guy.

Just to think about it here, what if we lost WW2 would the Axis be dragging out our leaders and shooting them in the street?
I don't know how to answer my own hypothetical question here but it is worth some thought I think.
What happened there was wrong on all accounts in my opinion here.
CNN online went as far as to call it the killing but not the murder of their leader.
Regards, Iwinder

Originally posted by ALF88

Originally posted by Skewed

Have you seen refutable proof to the otherwise? That aside.

Wrong my friend. Someone is innocent until proven guilty. It is up to the Gaddafi bashers to prove he is.

Nevermind

You should hold his head up on a stick and parade around with it.

You are aware that you CAN do that after a trial if someone found to be guilty? As has happened in the past with dictators already..

So you think that "lynching-justice" and "close range execution" is more appropriate than trialing someone for their crimes? IF YES...you would fit right in with "those" people and are not one bit better. Allah Akkhbar my *** ...

Mind you: I am NOT saying Gaddafi was a good man (as some people here on ATS do!)..but even a bad man needs to be trialed...and not in a TOTAL FAILUTE of "PR" and absurd display of animalistic behavior be "slaughtered". But..oh well..it's the middle-east...don't expect anything else than retards acting like animals.

Originally posted by Skewed

Originally posted by ALF88

Originally posted by Skewed

Have you seen refutable proof to the otherwise? That aside.

Wrong my friend. Someone is innocent until proven guilty. It is up to the Gaddafi bashers to prove he is.

Nevermind

edit on 25-10-2011 by Skewed because: (no reason given)

That is your proof? How can anyone take you serious?

And then you post the same BS accusations again

Originally posted by Skewed
If I had lived 40+ years under his tyranny, I might have put a bullet in his head myself.