One of Gadhafi's Sons Killed In NATO Airstrike, Libyan Official Says-CNN

I always come back to your blog because you always have relevant information. I know how hard you work on it! Next to my favorite taylor swift songs your blog is the one of my favorites. -Sara

Iam no fan of Ghadaffi's just as I was not that of Saddam Hussain nor that of Barrack Hussain Obama.It, however, beats me that those who vehemently opposed the war in Iraq are now applauding the merciless attack on Libya.Yes, Ghaddaffi had been a thorn in the flesh of many by openly calling for the overthrow and assassination of some leaders. But unlike Saddam Hussain, he did not use chemical weapons on his people nor on the citizens of another country. If he has a problem of oppression or elongated stay with his people, he should be allowed to sort it out with them.
Is aggression justified when it is carried out by a so-called popular leader? Those who criticised Pres. Bush on Iraq should be ashamed to back Obama on this senseless killings going on now.

@Egoigwe

Man, i don't dig your problem-solving skills at all. If you rant from now till eternity, you WILL NOT be capable of doing anything about the West and its hunger for developing nations' resources. We're talking reality here; not some historical fantasy.

It's left for developing nations to solve their problems from within and do as much as they can to prevent unwanted external interference in their domestic affairs. Ghadaffi did not do that. Mubarak (wittingly or unwittingly) and the Egyptian army were very smart to not let things get to that level (external inteference). Tunisia too.

It is said that the problems you can't solve, you learn to manage and live with it.

(CNN) -- Osama bin Laden is dead, sources told CNN Sunday night.
A senior U.S. official tells CNN that Osama bin Laden was killed by the U.S. forces in a mansion outside the Pakistani capital of Islamabad along with other family members.
Congressional and administration sources say U.S. officials have the body of bin Laden. Further details around his death were not immediately available.
U.S. President Barack Obama is expected to address the nation shortly.

OSAMA BIN LADEN HAS BEEN KILLED

Vengeance is mine says the Lord...you always reap what you sow.

Ladies and gentlemen,Hello everybody,           

input this URL: 

=== http://shopping01.org/ ===

you can find many cheap and fashion stuff 

(jor dan shoes) 

(NBA NFL NHL MLB jersey) 

( lv handbag) 

(cha nel wallet) 

(D&G sunglasses) 

(ed har dy jacket) 

shirts, bags, hat and the decorations.

(UGG boot) 

and so on..welcome to our website: 

Now ask yourself, what in the world persuaded the Americans to sleep with the enemy? Simple answer: gold, water, oil and loads of dollars. Why do you think for 41 years this rebellion had not happened, if Ghaddafi was so unpopular? The man does not even have a functional army for crying out loud. Don't you even dare tell me that his Praetorian guards which numbers about 2500 was what kept the entire Libyan population in awe of a 'despicable' dictator. You don't need to be a rocket scientist to know events in Libya are being orchestrated from Washington. All you need do is listen to what their politicians are saying.

Just the other day the UN was calling Libya a democratic model, ditto the US, UK/EU, France and Italy. What changed so quickly? The oil was slipping away from them whereas China and Russia were doing brisk business.

Come on now, brother! Saudi Arabia has had its monarchy for how long? It is still America's best ally , only perhaps next to Israel, in the Gulf. Bahrain has been ruled by the Al Khalifa family for 200 years! They are killing the citizens of those countries on a daily basis. Don't even pretend this about some altruistic democratic spur, it is not. It is about plundering the riches of weak nations, and us both know that. Benghazi is King idris' homestead and breeding ground for Alqaeda/CIA recruits, who only recently posted the largest number of suicide bombers to kill American soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan.

no tears for gaddafi'son.

The truth is that oil is the major issue involved. How many yrs has Uganda, Burkina Fasso Sommalia etc people suffered yet nothing spoil. Nigeria be careful cos we dont know whos next. Nato is fighting oil war but let not be another lraq xperience. I rest my case.

For some that says Ghadafi ruled for 40yrs..tend to forget that Libya was being ruled for ages by a King Idris. Ghadafo came thru a coup. Besides it is only in the USA that you have 2-term (max 8 yrs). That was not long ago. In Britain..the head of State the Queen has been there for only God knows when. In fact a single family colonized power for ever. In Italy Silvo has been in power for several years. In China..France, Germany. UK..there is no limit..
What is important is what has been achieved. In this modern world and with education of Libyans..it is impossible for Ghadafi to keep power without being widely supported

CONT'D

There is no denying the fact that the West is oil-thirsty and would stop at nothing. However, NATO will not invade Nigeria or drop bombs on us because no matter how imperfect, we have a people's govt, which changes every 4yrs and for now, what's happening in the Arab world won't happen here, at least not in that form.

If Africa and indeed any country wants to "defeat" the West, they've got to be very smart. And they can start by not perpetuating themselves in power or wanting their children to succeed them. What Mubarak (and the Egyptian army) is a very good way of denying the West room that room to manouvre which they're constantly looking for.

There wouldn't have been any propaganda if Ghadaffi had seen the writing on the wall and honorably stepped down. Remember you cannot fight a war against people and win.

@Egoigwe

It seems you're looking @ d issue from the international angle while I'm looking at it from the locally. U & I will agree though that there can't be an int. angle without the local one.

On the no of people killed since 41yrs that Ghadaffi has been in power, we don't need an Aljazeera. Watching even CNN for the past 10 wks alone tells u that that figure is belieavable. As a human, I believe it's not worth it killing just 1 fellow human just because I want to impose myself on my people. Ghadaffi abolished the old Libyans monarchy 41yrs ago and replaced it with what? Help me answer that.

What's happening in Libya now is similar to Saddam Hussain's Iraq. He gave George Bush a perfect excuse to invade his country by thinking he could carry a dictatorship well into the 21st century, and even get his sons to succeed himself. That will continue to happen to similar dictators esp if their countries have the black gold. CONT'D

Why blame Gadhafi? After ruling a country for more than four decades, you add "comfort" to your name and nothing else matters.

However, let me make it clear, Gadhafi's comfort days are over. The age demographics and interests of the people of the world have shifted over the years, with the youths outnumbering every other groups, they like to question what a leader has to offer and what is the rationale for staying so long in office? They are civilized, educated and they know leadership is in everyone, no one person has the monopoly of leadership, hence they are now speaking out. The time for the old brigades are over, there should not be any reason to stay in power for this long. Plain clothes dictators need to go now, they are corrupt and evil minded.
The business as usual attitude is no more a way of life.

The recent wave of events in the Middle East and Africa buttress my argument and this is the honest truth.

The other silly propaganda claim the West makes is that Ghaddafi used cluster bombs on civilians. Here too, they have had to swallow their vomit. In laying these claims the West has come up with no verifiable proof. As witnessed during Israel's siege on Gaza, cluster bombs leave traces in the air that last for hours. If it were true, the West's main stream media would have been inundated with pictures of these cluster bombs' streaks across the Libyan skies. That the Western press reports an incidence does not make it gospel. You must learn to read between the lines and ask yourself, why?

Back to Res 1970 $ 1973 briefly. What they represent are the fact that a gang of nations sitting on the UNSC can wake any day pass a fraudulent resolution obtained by duress and coercion and by it, attack any nation. How does the suppression of an armed uprising within the borders of a given nation amount to a threat against world peace, that's the question.

My dear brother, you seem to miss the point completely. The issue is not Ghaddafi per sec but who next? You do not seem to realize what the import of Resolution 1971 and 1973 really are. In a nutshell, it signifies the death of Democracy which you so eloquently extol and that of national sovereignty as we know it. I will come back to this later.

You claim Ghaddafi murdered 10s of thousands of his people, I can only assume you refer to AlJazeera's report on that issue. Well, it will surprise you to know that AlJazeera to its eternal shame has had to rescind that claim. But even at that AlJazeera did not say Ghaddafi killed 10,000 Libyans. The moniker was "Libya death toll 'reaches 10,000'" This claim AlJazeera admits was made by Libyan insurgents, while ignoring the toll from heavy NATO bombing, using depleted uranium and other terror weapons.

If he really means well for his people and indeed Africa and wants his ideals to become a reality, there are legal, morally permissible and 21st century means of doing so through support of like-minded progressives in the context of a real democratic transition. That's exactly what Hugo Chaves is doing in Venezuala. His people love him for his socialist ideals and it's hard for the West to fault him because wetter they like it or not, Venezuala has a democracy. In fact the US is one of the biggest buyers of Venezuela's oil. Don't people like you realise that dictatorship is no longer fashionable? Wake up man! My consolation though is that whether any1 likes it or not, Ghadaffi's time is up. It's only a matter of time.

CONT'D

If he really means well for his people and indeed Africa and wants his ideals to become a reality, there are legal, morally permissible and 21st century means of doing so through support of like-minded progressives in the context of a real democratic transition. That's exactly what Hugo Chaves is doing in Venezuala. His people love him for his socialist ideals and it's hard for the West to fault him because wetter they like it or not, Venezuala has a democracy. In fact the US is one of the biggest buyers of Venezuela's oil. Don't people like you realise that dictatorship is no longer fashionable? Wake up man! My consolation though is that whether any1 likes it or not, Ghadaffi's time is up. It's only a matter of time.

Africans can stand up against the West but they must be seen to lead their people humanely first, otherwise you'll give the West enough ammunition to ridicule your efforts. Look at Zimbabwe too.

@Egoigwe

It seems to me that you have a contract to come defend Ghadaffi on this website. Even Adolf Hitler will defend himself if asked. However that's not the point.

I see you can count and extol thousands of Ghadaffi's pro-Africa virtues. However, you can't find any fault in his willingness to kill 10s of thousands of his own people just to perpetuate himself in power. Angel Ghadaffi eh? Some1 that intentionally impoverished the eastern part of the country just because they are a different tribe and he's never had their support. This is a fact testified to by Libyans in case you don't know.

@Egoigwe

It seems to me that you have a contract to come defend Ghadaffi on this website. Even Adolf Hitler will defend himself if asked. However that's not the point.

I see you can count and extol Ghadaffi's pro-Africa virtues. However, you can't find any fault in his willingness to kill 10s of thousands of his own people just to perpetuate himself in power. Angel Ghadaffi eh? Some1 that intentionally impoverished the eastern part of the country just because they are a different tribe and he's never had their support.

If he really means well for his people and indeed Africa and wants his ideals to become a reality, there are legal, morally permissible and 21st century means of doing so through support of like-minded progressives in the context of a real democratic transition.

It is history that Colonel Gadaffi is one of the strongest voice in Africa and the greatest threat to the western Slave mastetrs. Its quite sad that the most developed nation is under firing because of Gadaffi's plans to nationalize his countries oil and spread the nations wealth.
Finally, it is highly stupid of people to allowed the diluted report of the western media to be their strong point used in criticizing Libya.

The only conclusion any sane mind can arrive at is that these so-called Western leaders and 'democrats' are in fact and deed, gangsters and robbers wrapped around a fake Democracy flag. They bestride our entire world with a nuclear sword, maiming and stealing from the weak and poor. They ought to be ashamed of themselves, these global bullies!

"Inciting spurious wars in Africa in the hope that this will revitalise their economies which are sinking ever more into the doldrums will ultimately hasten the western decline which actually began in 1884 during the notorious Berlin Conference. As the American economist Adam Smith predicted in 1865 when he publicly backed Abraham Lincoln for the abolition of slavery, ‘the economy of any country which relies on the slavery of blacks is destined to descend into hell the day those countries awaken’"

For continued reading:

http://www.pambazuka.org/en/category/features/72575

It is increasingly obvious that after Libya, the western coalition will go after Algeria, because apart from its huge energy resources, the country has cash reserves of around €150 billion. This is what lures the countries that are bombing Libya and they all have one thing in common – they are practically bankrupt. The USA alone, has a staggering debt of $US14,000 billion, France, Great Britain and Italy each have a US$2,000 billion public deficit compared to less than US$400 billion in public debt for 46 African countries combined..." cont'd part 7

"The African Monetary Fund is expected to totally supplant the African activities of the International Monetary Fund which, with only US$25 billion, was able to bring an entire continent to its knees and make it swallow questionable privatisation like forcing African countries to move from public to private monopolies. No surprise then that on 16-17December 2010, the Africans unanimously rejected attempts by Western countries to join the African Monetary Fund, saying it was open only to African nations..." cont'd part 6.

Only recently Ghadafi was advocating Nigeria would disintegrate! how his words has turn round to hunt him

"The US$30 billion frozen by Mr Obama belong to the Libyan Central Bank and had been earmarked as the Libyan contribution to three key projects which would add the finishing touches to the African federation – the African Investment Bank in Syrte, Libya, the establishment in 2011 of the African Monetary Fund to be based in Yaounde with a US$42 billion capital fund and the Abuja-based African Central Bank in Nigeria which when it starts printing African money will ring the death knell for the CFA franc through which Paris has been able to maintain its hold on some African countries for the last fifty years. It is easy to understand the French wrath against Gaddafi..." cont'd part 5

"An African satellite only cost a onetime payment of US$400 million and the continent no longer had to pay a US$500 million annual lease. Which banker wouldn’t finance such a project? But the problem remained – how can slaves, seeking to free themselves from their master’s exploitation ask the master’s help to achieve that freedom? Not surprisingly, the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, the USA, Europe only made vague promises for 14 years. Gaddafi put an end to these futile pleas to the western ‘benefactors’ with their exorbitant interest rates. The Libyan guide put US$300 million on the table; the African Development Bank added US$50 million more and the West African Development Bank a further US$27 million – and that’s how Africa got its first communications satellite on 26 December 2007..." cont'd part 4

"It was Gaddafi’s Libya that offered all of Africa its first revolution in modern times – connecting the entire continent by telephone, television, radio broadcasting and several other technological applications such as telemedicine and distance teaching. And thanks to the WMAX radio bridge, a low cost connection was made available across the continent, including in rural areas.

It began in 1992, when 45 African nations established RASCOM (Regional African Satellite Communication Organization) so that Africa would have its own satellite and slash communication costs in the continent. This was a time when phone calls to and from Africa were the most expensive in the world because of the annual US$500 million fee pocketed by Europe for the use of its satellites like Intelsat for phone conversations, including those within the same country..." (cont'd part 3)