Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff
by 8bitagent » Sun Jun 19, 2011 8:43 pm
by ilyinternet » Tue Jun 21, 2011 1:42 pm
by JackRiddler » Thu Jun 23, 2011 2:17 am
http://www.counterpunch.org/rugunda06222011.html
June 22, 2011
African Union Statement on the NATO Invasion of Libya
It's Time to End the Bombing and Find a Political Solution in Libya
By Dr. RUHAKANA RUGUNDA
At a meeting between the UN Security Council and the African Union High Level Ad hoc Committee on Libya on June 15, Dr Ruhakana Rugunda, Uganda's Permanent Representative to the United Nations gave the African Union's stand on NATO's invasion of Libya.
Mr. President,
1 . Thank you for organising this interactive dialogue. It is good that the United Nations Security Council has met the African Union (AU) Mediation Committee (High-Level Ad hoc Committee on Libya) so that we can exchange views on the situation in Libya in a candid manner. This should have happened much earlier because Libya is a founding member of the AU.
An attack on Libya or any other member of the African Union without express agreement by the AU is a dangerous provocation that should be avoided given the relaxed international situation in the last 20 years since the release of Nelson Mandela from jail and the eventual freedom of South Africa.
2. The UN is on safer ground if it confines itself on maintaining international peace and deterring war among member states.
3 . Intervening in internal affairs of States should be avoided except where there is proof of genocide or imminent genocide as happened in Rwanda or against the Jews in Germany and the European countries that were occupied by the Third Reich.
4. There are differences on the issue of Libya as to whether there was proof of genocide or intended genocide. Fighting between Government troops and armed insurrectionists is not genocide. It is civil war.
It is the attack on unarmed civilians with the aim of exterminating a particular group that is genocide – to exterminate the genes of targeted groups such as the Jews, Tutsis, etc. It is wrong to characterise every violence as genocide or imminent genocide so as to use it as a pretext for the undermining of the sovereignty of States.
Certainly, sovereignty has been a tool of emancipation of the peoples of Africa who are beginning to chart transformational paths for most of the African countries after centuries of predation by the slave trade, colonialism and neo-colonialism.
Careless assaults on the sovereignty of African Countries are, therefore, tantamount to inflicting fresh wounds on the destiny of the African peoples. If foreign invasions, meddlings, interventions, etc, were a source of prosperity, then, Africa should be the richest continent in the world because we have had all versions of all that: slave trade, colonialism and neo- colonialism. Yet, Africa has been the most wretched on account of that foreign meddling.
5. Whatever the genesis of the intervention by NATO in Libya, the AU called for dialogue before the UN resolutions 1970 and 1973 and after those Resolutions.
Ignoring the AU for three months and going on with the bombings of the sacred land of Africa has been high-handed, arrogant and provocative. This is something that should not be sustained.
To a discerning mind, such a course is dangerous. It is unwise for certain players to be intoxicated with technological superiority and begin to think they alone can alter the course of human history towards freedom for the whole of mankind. Certainly, no constellation of states should think that they can recreate hegemony over Africa.
6. The safer way is to use the ability to talk, to resolve all problems.
7 . The UN or anybody acting on behalf of the UN must be neutral in relation to the internal affairs of states. Certainly, that should be the case with respect to African countries. The UN should not take sides in a civil war. The UN should promote dialogue, peaceful resolution of conflicts, and help in enforcing agreements arrived at after negotiations such as the agreement on the Sudan.
8. Regardless of the genesis of the Libyan problem, the correct way forward now is dialogue without pre-conditions. The demand by some countries that Col. Muammar Gadaffi must go first before the dialogue is incorrect. Whether Gadaffi goes or stays is a matter for the Libyan people to decide. It is particularly wrong when the demand for Gadaffi's departure is made by outsiders. 9 . In order for dialogue, without pre-conditions, to take place, we need a ceasefire in place that should be monitored by the AU troops among others. This will help the AU to confirm the veracity of the stories of Gadaffi killing civilians intentionally.
10 . That dialogue should agree on the way forward in the direction of introducing competitive politics. Gadaffi thinks he has the most democratic system in the world of people's authority, elected local committees. Since so much chaos in Libya has emerged on the issue, Gadaffi should see the wisdom of accepting competitive democracy.
Gadaffi cannot ignore the fact that the rebels took over Benghazi and his authority melted away before NATO came in to confuse the picture. The pre- NATO uprising in Benghazi was, mainly, internal. Gadaffi may say that they were organised by Al Qaeda. Even if that is so, it is a fact that some Libyans in Benghazi threw out Gadaffi's authority. Therefore, Gadaffi must think of and agree to reforms, resulting into competitive politics.
11 . A transitional mechanism could, then, be worked out and competitive elections would take place after an agreed timetable.
12 . What about security for the opposition members? We have plenty of experience on such issues. What did we do in Burundi? We provided a protection force (a brigade) for the Hutu leaders who were living outside Burundi or were in the bush. One of them is now the President of Burundi after winning democratic elections.
13. How about those who are alleged to have committed war crimes – including Gadaffi and the rebels? Again, our decision in Burundi is useful here. We used the concept of "immunité provisoire" (provisional immunity), for all the stakeholders so that they could participate in the dialogue. After peace is realised, then a Truth and Reconciliation body could be set up to look into these matters. After democratic elections, trials of guilty parties can take place.
14. Long-term safety of everybody can be ensured by security sector reform and especially reform of the army, so that it takes orders from any elected President.
15 . The intervention in Libya was premised on the basis of protecting civilians and preventing further civilian deaths. However, the humanitarian situation in Libya remains serious and continues to get worse with continued hostilities.
Looking at how resolutions 1970 and 1973 are being implemented, the international community and the United Nations in particular, are being severely put to the test, as what is happening in Libya will undermine future efforts of the UN in the protection of civilians. There is, therefore, no need for any war-like activities in Libya because there is a peaceful way forward.
There has been no need for these war activities, ever since Gadaffi accepted dialogue when the AU mediation Committee visited Tripoli on April 10, 2011. Any war activities after that have been provocation for Africa. It is an unnecessary war. It must stop.
16. The story that the rebels cannot engage in dialogue unless Gadaffi goes away does not convince us. If they do not want dialogue, then, let them fight their war with Gadaffi without NATO bombing. Then, eventually, a modus vivendus will emerge between the two parties or one of them will be defeated. The attitude of the rebels shows us the danger of external involvement in internal affairs of African countries.
The externally sponsored groups neglect dialogue and building internal consensus and, instead, concentrate on winning external patrons. This cannot be in the interest of that country. Mobutu's Congo as well as performance of all the other neo-colonies of Africa in the 1960s, 1970s, 1980s and their eventual collapse in the 1990s prove that foreign sponsored groups are of no value to Africa.
17 . It is essential that the UN Security Council works with the African Union to ensure that a ceasefire is immediately established with an effective and verifiable monitoring mechanism and dialogue embarked upon, leading to a political process including transitional arrangements and the necessary reforms. The crisis in Libya requires a political solution and not a military one; and the AU Road Map is the most viable option.
Finally, what is needed on the issue of Libya is a genuine partnership between the United Nations Security Council and the African Union. By working together we can find a lasting solution to the crisis in Libya.
I thank you.
Dr Ruhakana Rugunda is Uganda's Permanent Representative to the United Nations.
by crikkett » Thu Jun 23, 2011 11:19 am
#LIBYA How is Gaddafi feeding his frontline troops? Supplies are coming from an unlikely source. We reveal all - 13GMT exclusive on #AJE
#LIBYA Turkish military rations packs found in three abandoned Gaddafi bases.
Leading legal expert says this may be a breach of Un resolution 1970
While Gaddafi troops are bombed by #NATO, food produced by one NATO ally is feeding them.
Some of the ration packs are dated as manufactured in March 2011.
All of the rations found in three different places in Nefusa produced by same firm http://t.co/MANQqnK
These are military style "heat in the bag" rations in foil paper. The US equivalent are known as MRE - Meals Ready (to) Eat.
Still on site - another live on #AJE soon, but will post close up of one of the packs when very slow sat internet allows.
posted a photo http://yfrog.com/kj7t5tj
posted a photo http://pi.pe/-u4bpsf
To answer some questions. These were found in bases where only Gaddafi troops were present.
They are military-style rations, in military green or silver foil.
Is it a breach of UN Resolution 1970? That is a question for the lawyers. But one leading expert has told #AJE he thinks it is.
The Manufacturing date, stamped on it, as translated by AJE istanbul Producer, is 03.2011. I don't speak Turkish myself
I have seen UN food aid many times - it is usually clearly marked as such. This is produced by company that specialises in military rations.
Another of the packs - in Military green colour. this one made in 2010. But when was it shipped? http://yfrog.com/gyq5trhj
#LIBYA We fellt the ground move with late night strike on ammunition store. Explosions could be heard for hours afterwards.
by Hammer of Los » Fri Jun 24, 2011 5:49 am
8. Regardless of the genesis of the Libyan problem, the correct way forward now is dialogue without pre-conditions. The demand by some countries that Col. Muammar Gadaffi must go first before the dialogue is incorrect. Whether Gadaffi goes or stays is a matter for the Libyan people to decide. It is particularly wrong when the demand for Gadaffi's departure is made by outsiders. 9 . In order for dialogue, without pre-conditions, to take place, we need a ceasefire in place that should be monitored by the AU troops among others. This will help the AU to confirm the veracity of the stories of Gadaffi killing civilians intentionally.
10 . That dialogue should agree on the way forward in the direction of introducing competitive politics. Gadaffi thinks he has the most democratic system in the world of people's authority, elected local committees. Since so much chaos in Libya has emerged on the issue, Gadaffi should see the wisdom of accepting competitive democracy.
Gadaffi cannot ignore the fact that the rebels took over Benghazi and his authority melted away before NATO came in to confuse the picture. The pre- NATO uprising in Benghazi was, mainly, internal. Gadaffi may say that they were organised by Al Qaeda. Even if that is so, it is a fact that some Libyans in Benghazi threw out Gadaffi's authority. Therefore, Gadaffi must think of and agree to reforms, resulting into competitive politics.
11 . A transitional mechanism could, then, be worked out and competitive elections would take place after an agreed timetable.
by 8bitagent » Sat Jun 25, 2011 5:39 pm
I am disturbed by knowing Ghadafy has killed civilians or has been disappearing people. I am definitely not for that. But the US and NATO are also making up lies, like "viagra fueled rape gangs" which they had to admit was not true.
And now NATO is systematically bombing the living daylights out of Tripoli...dont they realize the few people against Ghadafy are going to turn on NATO in that capital area?
Look at Syria...Assad's actions are wayyyy worse than Ghadafy, but aint noone talking of intervening there. This is all because banking/defense/oil deals between Moamar and the US, UK, France and Italy went south last year. Thats all this is. There is no "were here to save people", thats all crud.
by eyeno » Sun Jun 26, 2011 1:01 am
WWIII in Libya AND Syria in Days - B4IN Exclusive
Saturday, June 25, 2011 2:57
A trusted Before It's News source, one who told us about Osama bin Laden's death four hours before it was reported in the mainstream media, has alerted Before It's News that big moves are afoot in the Middle East.
"The real war is going to start in Libya and Syria in seven days. It might be a few more days than that, but it's definitely coming."
Upon first hearing this news, this long term military intelligence officer told me "I'm really shaken, today, I don't know what to say, I don't know what to do." He believes this is the start of WWIII.
According to this source, there are a number of factions in the military, some of which are concerned that they would be operating without the consent of Congress and that it could precipitate a constitutional crisis about the ligitimacy of this kind of order from the Chief Executive without the express approval of Congress who have been considering legislation to eliminate funding for any actions in Libya.
On the other side are groups in the military that "never saw a bomb they didn't want to drop", the source said. The source continued "we don't have the manpower because the entire continent of Africa is going to come unglued. You jump Libya and Syria, you jumped Iran. You're going to find out real soon whether or not Iran's got nukes because they aren't going to care at that point, it's an existential threat to them."
Military analysts have noted the vast size of the African continent and the difficulties of waging war in that region. The U.S. military created AFRICOM to coordinate the various military bases and branches in Africa.
"There will be clues coming through the news over the next few days, but all the assets, the aircraft carriers, submarines and so on are already in place for this kind of operation" he added. He is also deeply concerned that if this comes to pass, the Chinese and Russians will be forced to jump in as well (on the other side).
http://beforeitsnews.com/story/751/492/ ... usive.html
by Hammer of Los » Sun Jun 26, 2011 5:19 am
dearold8bit wrote:Look at Syria...Assad's actions are wayyyy worse than Ghadafy, but aint noone talking of intervening there.
by Gouda » Fri Jul 01, 2011 3:55 pm
Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi threatens attacks in Europe if NATO continues air campaign
AP – 2 hrs 35 mins ago
TRIPOLI, Libya (AP) — Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi threatens attacks in Europe if NATO continues air campaign.
http://news.yahoo.com/libyan-leader-moa ... 57078.html
by JackRiddler » Sat Jul 30, 2011 2:08 pm
http://counterpunch.org/sengupta07272011.html
July 27, 2011
NATO's Futile War
Libyan Rebels in Retreat
By KIM SENGUPTA
Fresh diplomatic efforts are under way to try to end Libya's bloody civil war, with the UN special envoy flying to Tripoli to hold talks after Britain followed France in accepting that Muammar Gaddafi cannot be bombed into exile.
The change of stance by the two most active countries in the international coalition is an acceptance of realities on the ground. Despite more than four months of sustained air strikes by Nato, the rebels have failed to secure any military advantage. Colonel Gaddafi has survived what observers perceive as attempts to eliminate him and, despite the defection of a number of senior commanders, there is no sign that he will be dethroned in a palace coup.
The regime controls around 20 per cent more territory than it did in the immediate aftermath of the uprising on 17 February.
The main obstacle to a ceasefire, so far, has been the insistence of the opposition and their Western backers that Colonel Gaddafi and his family must leave Libya. But earlier this month Mustafa Abdul Jalil, the leader of the Transitional National Council, stated that the dictator can remain in the country if he gives up the reins of power.
The French President, Nicolas Sarkozy, had wanted to declare victory in a Bastille Day speech on 14 July. Soon after this date, the country's Defence and Foreign Ministers pressed the case for a negotiated settlement.
The UK, which appeared to have been taken by surprise at the French volte-face, tried to maintain a tough line. But that has also changed in the last 48 hours, with first Downing Street and then the Foreign Secretary William Hague saying that Colonel Gaddafi may after all be allowed to remain in his homeland. Mr Hague said the UK would support whatever agreement was reached by the two sides in Libya.
Many senior British military officers have been less than enthusiastic about the Libyan mission, questioning its direction, and privately complaining that it is a distraction from unfinished business in Afghanistan. David Cameron's attempts to censure commanders who have raised concerns about fighting two wars while resources are being cut back has also led to growing dissatisfaction.
The UN envoy to Libya, Abdul Elah al-Khatib, had met opposition leaders in Benghazi before flying to Tripoli.
Meanwhile, the Libyan regime, which had offered an unconditional ceasefire a month ago, with senior members indicating that Colonel Gaddafi would be eased out, appears to have hardened its position, with officials maintaining that Nato bombing must stop before any talks can be held and demanding the release of Libyan assets frozen by the international community.
It remains unclear how a peace deal would be policed. Nato countries are adamant that they do not want to put boots on the ground, while Alain Le Roy, the UN's head of peacekeeping operations, has stated that the organisation only has limited manpower. The rebel administration is wary of involving African Union forces, holding that many of the governments of member states were clients of the Gaddafi regime.
* The Lockerbie bomber Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, who was released from prison in Scotland almost two years ago in the expectation that he would die within three months, has attended a pro-Gaddafi rally in Libya.
Megrahi was seen in a wheelchair in Libyan state television footage said to have been broadcast live. A presenter introduced him and said the conviction for blowing Pan Am Flight 103 out of the sky over Lockerbie in 1988 was a "conspiracy". He served eight years of a 27-year sentence for the attack, which killed 270 people.
Kim Sengupta writes for the Independent, where this dispatch originally appeared.
http://counterpunch.org/mountain07272011.html
July 27, 2011
Worse Than Iraq
Lies of the Libyan War
By THOMAS MOUNTAIN
As exposed here on CounterPunch the lies used to justify the NATO war against Libya have surpassed those created to justify the invasion of Iraq. Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch both had honest observers on the ground for months following the rebellion in eastern Libya and both have repudiated every major charge used to justify the NATO war on Libya.
According to the Amnesty observer, who is fluent in Arabic, there is not one confirmed instance of rape by the pro-Gadaffi fighters, not even a doctor who knew of one. All the Viagra mass rape stories were fabrications.
Amnesty could not verify a single "African mercenary" fighting for Gaddafi story, and the highly charged international satellite television accounts of African mercenaries raping women that were used to panic much of the eastern Libyan population into fleeing their homes were fabrications.
There were no confirmed accounts of helicopter gun ships attacking civilians and no jet fighters bombing people which completely invalidates any justification for the No-Fly Zone inSecurity Council resolution used as an excuse for NATO to launch its attacks on Libya.
After three months on the ground in rebel controlled territory, the Amnesty investigator could only confirm 110 deaths in Benghazi which included Gadaffi supporters.
Only 110 dead in Benghazi? Wait a minute, we were told thousands had died there, ten thousand even. No, only 110 lost their lives including pro-government people.
No rapes, no African mercenaries, no helicopter gun ships or bombers, and only 110 ten deaths prior to the launch of the NATO bombing campaign, every reason was based on a lie.
Today according to the Libyan Red Crescent Society, over 1,100 civilians have been killed by NATO bombs including over 400 women and children. Over 6,000 Libyan civilians have been injured or wounded by the bombing, many very seriously.
Compared to the war on Iraq, these numbers are tiny, but the reasons for the Libyan war have no merit in any form.
Saddam Hussein was evil, he invaded his neighbors in wars that killed up to a million. He used Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD's) in the form of poison gas on both his neighbors and his own people, killing tens of thousands. He was brutal and corrupt and when American tanks rolled into Iraq the Iraqi people refused to fight for him, simply put their weapons down and went home.
Libya under Col. Gadaffi hasn't invaded their neighbors. Gadaffi never used WMD's on anyone, let alone his own people. As for Gadaffi being brutal, in Libya's neighbor Algeria, the Algerian military fought a counterinsurgency for a decade in the 1990's that witnessed the deaths of some 200,000 Algerians. Now that is brutal and nothing anywhere near this has happened in Libya.
In Egypt and Tunisia, western puppets like Mubarak and Ben Ali had almost no support amongst their people with few if anyone willing to fight and die to defend them.
The majority of the Libyan people are rallying behind the Libyan government and "the leader", Muammar Gadaffi, with over one million people demonstrating in support on July 1 in Tripoli, the capital of Libya. Thousands of Libyan youth are on the front lines fighting the rebels and despite thousands of NATO air strikes authentic journalists on the ground in western Libya report their morale remains high.
In Egypt the popular explosion that resulted in the Army seizing power from Mubarak began in the very poorest neighborhoods in Cairo and other Egyptian cities where the price of basic food items like bread, sugar and cooking oil had skyrocketed and lead to widespread hunger. In many parts of Egypt's poor neighborhoods gasoline/benzene is easier to find then clean drinking water. Medical care and education is only for those with the money to pay for it. Life for the people of Tunisia is not that much better.
In contrast, the Libyan people have the longest life expectancy in the Arab world. The Libyan people have the best, free public health system in the Arab world. The Libyan people have the best, free public education system in the Arab world. Most Libyan families own their own home and most Libyan families own their own automobile. Libya is so much better off then its neighbors every year tens of thousands of Egyptians and Tunisians migrated to Libya to earn money to feed their families, doing the dirty work the Libyan people refused to do.
When it comes to how Gadaffi oversaw a dramatic rise in the standard of living for the Libyan people despite decades of UN inSecurity Council sanctions against the Libyan economy honest observers acknowledge that Gadaffi stands head and shoulders above the kings, sheiks, emirs and various dictators who rule the rest of the Arab world.
So why did NATO launch this war against Libya?
First of all Gadaffi was on the verge of creating a new banking system in Africa that was going to put the IMF, World Bank and assorted other western banksters out of business in Africa. No more predatory western loans used to cripple African economies, instead a $42 billion dollar African Investment Bank would be supplying major loans at little or even zero interest rates.
LIbya has funded major infrastructure projects across Africa that have begun to link up African economies and break the perpetual dependency on the western countries for imports have been taking place. Here in Eritrea the new road connecting Eritrea and Sudan is just one small example.
What seem to have finally tipped the balance in favor of direct western military intervention was the reported demand by Gadaffi that the USA oil companies who have long been major players in the Libyan petroleum industry were going to have to compensate Libya to the tune of tens of billions of dollars for the damage done to the Libyan economy by the USA instigated "Lockerbie Bombing" sanctions imposed by the UN inSecurity Council throughout the 1990's into early 2000's. This is based on the unearthing of evidence that the CIA paid millions of dollars to witnesses in the Lockerbie Bombing trial to change their stories to implicate Libya which was used as the basis for the very damaging UN sanctions against Libya. The government of the USA lied and damaged Libya so the USA oil companies were going to have to pay up to cover the cost of their governments actions. Not hard to see why Gadaffi had to go isn't it?
Add the fact that Gadaffi had signaled clearly that he saw both Libya's and Africa's future economic development linked more to China and Russia rather than the west and it was just a matter of time before the CIA's contingency plan to overthrow the Libyan government was put on the front burner.
NATO's war against Libya has much more in common with NATO's Kosovo war against Serbia.
But one still cannot compare Gadaffi to Saddam or even the much smaller time criminals in the Serbian leadership. The Libyan War lies are worse than Iraq.
Thomas C. Mountain is the only independent western journalist in the Horn of Africa, living and reporting from Eritrea since 2006. He was a member of the 1st US Peace Delegation to Libya in 1987. He can be reached at: thomascmountain at yahoo dot com
by Nordic » Sun Jul 31, 2011 1:59 am
by 8bitagent » Sun Jul 31, 2011 3:55 am
by StarmanSkye » Sun Jul 31, 2011 4:40 am
by Nordic » Sun Jul 31, 2011 4:49 am
by Bruce Dazzling » Sun Jul 31, 2011 10:37 am
Nordic wrote:Because the American populance has been brainwashed into believing that they are "consumers" and they can pick their "brands". They've been trained this way, like mice learning to negotiate a maze to get a bit of food.
But we've also been brainwashed to only choose from the "brands" made available to us.
I think about this every time I go to Ralph's, which is one of the Big Three Grocery chains in this country (it's Kroger, and the others are Safeway and Albertson's). I look at the stuff on the shelves and realize I don't really want any of the crap they offer. Yet most people feel they have no choice.
People feel they have no choice, but, like the mice, they have to hit one of the levers to feel good. That's the training.
It's either (R) or it's (D) in this country. People don't even QUESTION that.
If you bring up a third party or the notion of getting rid of these parties altogether people just give you the blankest stares, like you just talked about making a car that runs on carrot juice or something.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 165 guests