Libya, military stalemate, Gaddafi named as war crimes suspect by ICC

[john moriarty]

There is nothing nicer than
seeing people celebrating
the prospect of freedom.
Even better - in this part
of the world - is women
doing likewise. I hope it
continues for them aswell.

[tyke2010]

[QUOTE=Riadach;4245156]Really what is your methodology for established the veracity of such reports? Search engines don't bring facts. They frequently bring up second-hand rubbish in fact.

That's the whole point of a search engine. I then sift through what comes up. I can give you a tutorial in how to use them, if you like. By the sounds of things, you want to search for a Starbucks promotional code but type in the wrong things and give up when you can't get your tacky coupon...

If Russia Today passes your test, a media service widely recognised as a partisan mouthpiece of the russia government, than I can safely assume that your 'research' isn't worth a bucket of piss.

I'd much rather have a bucket of piss than the bag of ************************e you get from your own sitting on your backside- pro-war mass media tripe that sings the tune of warmongering Yanks, their call to war and the little fifes that have you in a trance.

Show us how your search engine sources are superior please. What methods are they employing that the likes of the guardian, aljazeera, alarabiya, bbc, cnn, each of whom have reporters on the ground and did not just in the rixos hotel, did not?

And how on Earth do I do that? What is the point in having reporters 'on the ground' when as of yet they still have not interviewed any civilians? Where are their fact-finding missions? Why have they not investigated any of the allegations against Gaddafi as they usually love to do when it suits them? Why is it that they stand there in the street saying: 'the sound of guns is all around me', yet they never visit real people affected by the bombing you believe is so lovely. Why is it that it is only these Western-appeasing 'rebels' (who will be the first to salute Gaddafi in a few years after the country is reduced to ruins as capitalist foreigners converge on the nation and carve up its spoils) who are interviewed?

[Toland]

Let's hope the people of Libya can win the peace too.

The precedents are mixed.

[owedtojoy]

Al Jazeera report fighting outside Ghadaffi's compound. Apparently, he has been interviewed on the phone.

2.32am: Confirmation through Reuters Flash on Twitter that Mohammed Gaddafi is unharmed. He was back in with Al-Jazeera via phone: "My family and I are safe. I don't know who fired on us."

3.41am: The earlier scenes of jubilation in Green Square appear to have dissipated. CNN's Sara Sidner, who entered Tripoli late on Sunday with rebel forces and made it briefly to Green Square, has pulled back to the outskirts of the city. She reports that rebel forces, earlier seen celebrating, feared Gaddafi's troops were planning an attempt to retake the square. The rebels' mood had changed and they were taking up defensive positions, she said.

Fighting is still going on. A rebel representative was on the radio talking about "restoring democracy" - how do you restore what you never had?

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/af...941319259.html

[Clanrickard]

. Sadly, however, they have been well and truly fooled, just like the people of Iraq were. Libya as the African nation with the highest standard of living, generous welfare, centralised banks and real progress is to be no more. Libya's f*cked.

I invite all readers to have good guffaw.

[Thac0man]

Fighting is still going on. A rebel representative was on the radio talking about "restoring democracy" - how do you restore what you never had?

Good point. From the point of view of the observer the arc of Libyan liberation has not yet finished its journey. Though we are still seeing the fires burning in Tripoli, Libya has yet to forge a truely representitive government or even impliment full and proper civil order. There is alot to do.

But as you say there is no democracy to reestablish, it is a new democracy, and the first time in history I think that the Libyan people will have had a proper say in how their country is governed. There are interesting times ahead.

Personally I am hopeful. There will be trouble, but so far we have not seen widespread lawlessness and Benghazi has not turned into Mogadishu. As long as Gaddafi forces hold out the TNC has a period of grace. But as soon as the shooting stops there are those who no doubt will be eager to retain their weapons. That is the first test for the TNC. Libya is entering that period where as a Transitional body the TNC will have to earn its spurs and prove its worth.

[Thac0man]

I invite all readers to have good guffaw.

Noted and duely gaffawed.

[Riadach]

Where is the evidence? Even the background to these mercenaries is shrouded in mystery. We had Susan rice making similar outlandish statements about viagra and civilian rapes, yet even she admitted to having no evidence, but that didn't stop you from believing the lies. How do you justify the murders by the rebels of civilians? Of those who dared oppose them? What about the lynching of innocent blacks because they were mistaken for foreign mercenaries?

What evidence are you looking for? The numerous videos of Gaddafi;'s men firing on civilians that populate youtube? That not good enough? You're so entrenched in your own opinion that no evidence would be good enough. I have condemned attacks/lynchings which were carried out by a tiny minority, and disbelieved the viagra claims from the start. None of this in my mind contradicts the fact that Gaddafi was a tyrant and that it is to the benefit of the libyan people that he is gone.

In the name of democracy I'll hear you say, no doubt.

Some of it was bloodthirsty revenge. That doesn't invalidate the aims and objectives of those actually wanted a fair and free libya.

Why have NATO and Western leaders continually rejected peaceful negotiations? How could the Arab League's decision triumph over the African Union when the AU has the power, mandate and military to deal with such affairs? That's right, because the AU did not support military action but the AL did.

What mandate? The AU has been bankrolled by libya since it's foundation. It is gaddaffi's pet project. It is not an impartial observer in all this, unlike the arab league which seems to have concern for ordinary arabs at heart. I won't claim it is a perfect organisation. And ceasefires were continually rejected mooted and broken by Gaddafi. His word was untrustworthy. Even today he's using snipers to target civilians and doctors entering and exiting the hospital in Libya.

As for residents celebrating in Tripoli, maybe they welcome a change in leadership and feel they might now be able to have a free press, etc. Sadly, however, they have been well and truly fooled, just like the people of Iraq were. Libya as the African nation with the highest standard of living, generous welfare, centralised banks and real progress is to be no more. Libya's f*cked.

You have nothing to back this up other than your own paranoid delusions.

[Riadach]

[QUOTE=tyke2010;4245215]

Really what is your methodology for established the veracity of such reports? Search engines don't bring facts. They frequently bring up second-hand rubbish in fact.

That's the whole point of a search engine. I then sift through what comes up. I can give you a tutorial in how to use them, if you like. By the sounds of things, you want to search for a Starbucks promotional code but type in the wrong things and give up when you can't get your tacky coupon...

So you choose which one is correct or not based on your own prejudices/ideology? That sounds very methodical.

I'd much rather have a bucket of piss than the bag of ************************e you get from your own sitting on your backside- pro-war mass media tripe that sings the tune of warmongering Yanks, their call to war and the little fifes that have you in a trance.

No, if you read my posts I frequently oppose American intervention, and did so with Iraq. Libya was a different kettle of fish. At its heart it was a rebellion to procure justice and democracy, so I stood behind it. I'm not the kind who says 'America is for it, therefore I'm agin it' then begins sifting through the internet to focus on sources that agree with my point of view. I think this is the nature of your 'research'.

And how on Earth do I do that?

By posting verbatim something that was stated as part of this Gaddafi run press tours and not employing any kind of check that the story might be manipulated? Once again, says a lot for your methodology.

What is the point in having reporters 'on the ground' when as of yet they still have not interviewed any civilians? Where are their fact-finding missions? Why have they not investigated any of the allegations against Gaddafi as they usually love to do when it suits them? Why is it that they stand there in the street saying: 'the sound of guns is all around me', yet they never visit real people affected by the bombing you believe is so lovely. Why is it that it is only these Western-appeasing 'rebels' (who will be the first to salute Gaddafi in a few years after the country is reduced to ruins as capitalist foreigners converge on the nation and carve up its spoils) who are interviewed?

But they have! On both sides. The Guardian has frequently been reporting both points of view for instance. No one is under the delusion that Gaddaffi has no support, not even the rebels. You're creating strawman arguments.

[Telemachus]