TNC-NATO siege of Sirte is a war crime.

[EFerrari]

*
TNC-NATO siege of Sirte is a war crime.

By NicolasDavies - Posted on 02 September 2011

NATO and the Transitional National Council in Libya (or Paris or Qatar or wherever it is) have reportedly given the people of Sirte ten days to surrender or face a full military onslaught. This is not a cease-fire. While they await their fate, they will still be subject to artillery fire and NATO bombing, and food, water and electricity have already been cut off.

This closely resembles the tactics adopted toward resistance-held towns in Iraq by U.S. occupation forces. On October 14th 2004, the Washington Post reported that water and electricity supplies to Falluja had been cut off, one day before the start of Ramadan. Its population was then starved and bombarded for 3 weeks before the final assault by U.S. Marines that killed 4,000 to 6,000 civilians.

But these siege tactics, which have been used against civilian populations since the Middle Ages, have been outlawed by the Geneva Conventions. In particular, Article 14 of the second Protocol to the Geneva Conventions states, "Starvation of civilians as a method of combat is prohibited. It is therefore prohibited to attack, destroy, remove or render useless for that purpose objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population such as food-stuffs, agricultural areas for the production of food-stuffs, crops, livestock, drinking water installations, and supplies and irrigation works."

The 4th Geneva Convention prohibits all forms of attacks on civilians and the collective punishment of civilian populations, so virtually everything that the combined TNC-NATO forces are doing to the people of Sirte is strictly illegal and in fact criminal.

http://warisacrime.org/content/tnc-nato-siege-sirte-war-crime

[amborin]

1. K&R

[DeSwiss]

2. K&R

- Empires make their own rules.....

[tabatha]

3. NATO and TNC are trying to prevent further bloodshed

by allowing more time for negotiations for a peaceful end.

However, it probably stands no chance because of the real war criminals:

RRowleyTucson Robert Rowley
Reports Muttasim #Gaddafi has had 11 people executed in #Sirte this evening who attempted to negotiate a surrender w/ #NTC. #Libya #Feb17
4 hours ago

[EFerrari]

6. When you commit a war crime, that makes you a war criminal.

There is no pointing fingers at unverified bullshit from twitter and saying, they did it more, Mommy.

[joshcryer]

7. The rebels have not in fact cut electricity or water to Sirte, and they likely won't do that.

Unlike Gaddafi's troops who sabotaged the water pumps to Tripoli, who cut off Misrata's water and electricity for 4 months, etc.

The article is based on a false dilemma that is unlikely to happen. If you cut the water and electricty off and starve an entire population it will backfire on you. Gaddafi's siege of Misrata likely spelled his downfall, because he created the people who wanted to rid themselves of him.

[tabatha]

12. Gaddafi cut the power in these surrounded cities.

Because he did not want them to know what was going on.

Apparently, in one it has been restored.

[tabatha]

14. Oh, and by the way, it was the residents of Sirte

who asked for the extension to negotiate.

[joshcryer]

8. I think that ultimately it is bullshit anyway, since the rebels haven't done that here.

And I find it unlikely that they'll do it because, ultimately, water and electricity are not particularly useful conduits for negotiation. When Gaddafi besieged Misrata it was clear that there was no negotiation, that ultimately Gaddafi felt he had absolute power and that if no one ceded to his will, they would all be collectively punished.

Indeed, Gaddafi's own laws enumerated collective punishment.

[inna]

15. Complete and utter bullshit.

#Feb17 is a disinformation propaganda site btw.

[tabatha]

19. Sirte Deadline: Anti-Gaddafi Fighters 'Dismayed'

There had been an ultimatum of midnight on Friday for people in the town to lay down their weapons - and the rebels had been gearing up for an assault for Saturday.

But that deadline has been extended for seven days by National Transitional Council (NTC) chairman Mustafa Abdul Jalil in the capital Tripoli.

And these military leaders who have pushed the Gaddafi forces back in recent days have told Sky News they feel blindsided by the decision.

They also claim to have been further outmanoeuvred by the negotiating tactics of pro-Gaddafi forces.

A senior unnamed member of the Gaddafi clan in the southern city of Sabha has now stepped forward as a negotiator with the NTC in Tripoli.

He is saying he will now negotiate on behalf of both Sabha and Sirte - two major Gaddafi strongholds.

Commanders of anti-Gaddafi forces are also conscious of their men being left waiting in the desert in sweltering temperatures for another week.

http://news.sky.com/home/article/16061676

[tabatha]

4. Libya: pro-Gaddafi forces left 29 detainees in hot metal containers - 19 died

Posted: 01 September 2011

* 29 left to die in two shipping containers in 40-degree heat, only 10 survived

Pro al-Gaddafi left 29 detainees to suffocate while locked inside metal containers in the sweltering June heat in north-western Libya, Amnesty International has discovered. Nineteen of the detainees died as a result of the ordeal.
Three survivors have described how al-Gaddafi loyalists tortured them and then imprisoned them along with 26 others in two cramped
cargo containers on 6 June at a construction site in al-Khums, 120 km east of Tripoli.

The detainees endured temperatures above 40 degrees Celsius and drank their own sweat and urine when the limited water supply ran out. Their captors shouted “rats, shut up," ignoring their cries for help. This is the first report of the June incident, because al-Khums was off-limits to independent reporting until it fell under the control of the National Transitional Council on 21 August.

It is a war crime for any party to a conflict to kill or torture prisoners.

Amnesty International North Africa Researcher Diana Eltahawy, who is currently in Libya, said:

“This is obviously appalling and inhumane treatment of a group of people who were mostly civilians.”

http://www.amnesty.org.uk/news_details.asp?NewsID=19664

[EFerrari]

10. I will not play dueling atrocities with you. n/t

[tabatha]

13. The only side that has been involved in atrocities is Gaddafi's side.

Thus there can be no dueling atrocities.

[inna]

17. War is Peace!111!

:patriot:

:nuke: :nuke:

[PufPuf23]

24. The opinion of a pragmatic realist !!!! nt

[Swede]

5. The end is in sight.

Libya will be free.

[scheming daemons]

9. Yes... let's try Obama for warcrimes now too. Love DU, just love it.

[Ikonoklast]

95. I love the posters here that love them some dictators.

Funny thing, that, they are usually the same ones that hate Obama.

[joshcryer]

11. FYI, to those easily misled, Sirte cut Tripoli off of water. Sirte still has water and electricity.

The author linked in the OP is lying when they say that water and electricity have been shut off.

http://www.almasryalyoum.com/en/node/491081

A council spokesman said a pumping station for Tripoli's water supply that lies in the pro-Qadhafi town of Sabha had been damaged and could not be reached for repair.

However, a report by the European Union's humanitarian office (ECHO), said pro-Qadhafi forces in Sirte had cut two-thirds of the water supply to Tripoli, most of which comes from the "Great Man-made River," a huge project built under Qadhafi that pumps out water from under the Sahara desert.

[tabatha]

18. Pro-Gaddafi forces in Sirte have cut off the water supply to Tripoli

GENEVA Aug 30 (Reuters) - Pro-Gaddafi forces in Sirte have cut off the water supply to Tripoli, which is struggling to find enough water after a reservoir dried up and its main supply from the south was dwindling, aid agency sources said on Tuesday.

By turning off a valve at Sirte, the birthplace of Muammar Gaddafi, forces loyal to the ousted leader have cut 200,000 cubic metres per day, leaving only 100,000 cubic metres available for the capital, according to a report by the European Union's humanitarian office (ECHO) obtained by Reuters on Tuesday.

Humanitarian workers fear that Tripoli, where the health system is just getting back on its feet after days of fierce fighting, now risks a serious water shortage.

Tripoli's main supply comes from the Jebel Hassouna region to the south, where only 30 of 580 wells are now operational, the ECHO report said. The International Committee of the Red Cross has said the main regional reservoir, at Gharyan, has dried up.

The Hassouna wells have been in the hands of Berber tribes loyal to Libya's National Transitional Council since Friday, but Libyan engineers have not managed to travel to the area to restart the system because of security concerns.

http://af.reuters.com/article/libyaNews/idAFL5E7JU25J20110830

[inna]

16. K&R. The whole aggression against Libya is one big fat fucking war crime.

And I do hope that the perpetrators will see their day in court one day.

[tabatha]

20. Sabha & Sirte

FreeBenghazi Libya.elHurra
Electricity returned in #Sabha. There is uneasy calm but thuwar say they are ready for any surprise attack #Libya v Sabha17feb
4 hours ago

Sirte_Feb17 Sirtawi
Mass grave found near #Sirte. 45 bodies tortured 2 death. Man found alive but has gone mad. #gaddaficirmes
16 hours ago

dovenews Libyan™
#Sirte is completely cut off from Libya & the rest of the world, no electricity, no phone lines, only Gaddafi propaganda machine.
29 Aug

SaloumehZ SaloumehZ
RT @dovenews BRK: Qaddafi's regime ordered the execution of 100,000 people, a document found in a Tripoli prison shows. v @AlArabiya_Eng
18 hours ago

[blindpig]

21. k&r

[Hart2008]

22. I met a Brit the other day who recently taught in Tripoli for 2.5 years.

He said he never heard or saw Quadaffi's "secret police", and that in the whole time he was there he never heard a single Libyan make a derogatory comment about Quadaffi. He said that other people who have worked there have said the same thing, and their general conclusion is that NATO is not being very honest about things there. He said the Libyan people were absolutely wonderful people, and working in Libya was the best job he ever had.

From what I noticed, the Qataris are very much involved there. Look at the difference between the early and late pictures of capturing Bab al-Azizya palace!



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_Qatar

A latter picture shows the Qatari flag removed, and now replaced with

the flag of the Libyan rebels.



So who is doing the actual fighting there?

[ellisonz]

25. A single misinformed anectdote does not constitute credible evidence...

...yes, there are Qatari special forces with the rebels, but no unbiased person would claim that the absolute vast majority of blood shed fighting Gaddafi hasn't been free Libyan blood.

Don't be willfully ignorant.

[Hart2008]

27. It is willfully ignorant to think that NATO would care about Libya if not for the oil.

It is too soon to tell what the real situation is with the Libyan rebels. The number of former Quadaffi officials there makes it look more like a coup than a revolution.

There have been large amounts of arms distributed to the Libyan population, and the situation there remains very fluid. Time will tell what the truth is, but it certainly involves oil contracts and profits.

[tabatha]

30. It is willfully ignorant to make shit up.

<<The number of former Quadaffi officials there makes it look more like a coup than a revolution.

Gaddafi enjoyed between 10-15% support of the population, and those people received special privileges.

Do you know that before the rebels took over towns in their march to the east, they obtained the permission of the town elders beforehand?

Do you know why Tripoli fell so fast - complete and utter capitulation in a city that was supposed to be a Gaddfai stronghold?
Google "Double agents Libya", and you may move from being totally ignorant to a little more informed.

<<There have been large amounts of arms distributed to the Libyan population, and the situation there remains very fluid.

Once again you show your ignorance. Libyans had no arms at the outset, and as they took over town after town they raided Ammo dumps left behind by Gaddafi forces. There was a joke on the AJE blogs about how the rebels were returning Gaddafi's weapons to him.

Gaddafi distributed arms to SOME people in Tripoli and Sirte.

The TNC are now in the process of getting weapons off the street. They have stated that all arms are to be returned, and for those people who want to keep them they have to either join the army or security.

I have read dozens of articles every day from two sources - the Libya threads on DU and the AJE threads. Both of these sources compile information from around the world, both positive and negative.

And I hate to say this, but you do not know what you are talking about. Period.

[Hart2008]

35. A good advocate always cites his or her source.

I don't see any direct sources for your "facts".

It appears that your facts come from AJE, which as a Qatari company, has some credibility issues considering the Qatari role in this conflict.

I suggest that you learn to be a bit more skeptical of news organizations whose ownership is serving the Qatari national interest.

[tabatha]

85. I told you to google for the source.

However, since you are incapable of doing that, here;

http://shabablibya.org/news/a-double-agent-in-gadhafi-camp

The original source was

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111904875404576530700997174360.html

which has nothing to do with AJE or Qatar. So quit babbling about them.

I have told you before and I will say it again

--- news from news organizations ALL over the world are aggregated on both the DU Libya blogs and the AJE blogs.

If you are incapable of being a fact finder, here is the link and use your imagination as to how much Qatar is posting there.

http://blogs.aljazeera.net/africa/2011/08/24/crucial-moments-save-peace-libya

[joshcryer]

37. I am an ardent Libyan advocate, and I don't argue that because it's nonsense.

Who gives a shit what the interests of foreign entities are: THE REVOLUTIONARIES ARE IN CONTROL OF THEIR FUTURE.

[Hart2008]

40. Follow the oil contracts! Russians are out and Western oil companies are in. NT

[joshcryer]

43. Gaddafi's imperialist Russian army bases and foreign oil contracts are out.

That's for damn sure.

[Hart2008]

49. Which foreign oil companies are now in? Qui Bono? When did Russia bomb an Arab country?

How are the Russians imperialists, and NATO countries not?

:crazy:

Thanks for admitting that this is really about the oil.

[joshcryer]

51. Russia is well known for its imperialism, hello? Chechnya?

Please spare me this dishonesty.

Russia wanted to put a http://www.abc.net.au/news/2009-01-16/russia-plans-navy-bases-in-libya-syria-yemen-report/268898">naval base in Libya and Gaddafi was http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/nov/01/libya-russia-gadafy-united-states">all for it.

[Hart2008]

52. Chechnya isn't Arab and Qadaffi was denied membership in the Warsaw Pact.

Spare me your distortions of history.

The Arab people consider the Westerners as imperialists, not the Russians.

The Westerners support Israel, not the Russians.

The Westerners need the Arab oil, the Russians have their own.

[joshcryer]

54. Chechnya suffers from Russian imperialism, dunno what being Arab has to do with it.

Meanwhile Gaddafi was open to a Russian naval base as I established and it would've certainly led to the expansion of the CSTO (Russia's NATO).

[Hart2008]

55. I'll ask you again, when did Russia bomb an Arab country? Your ipse dixit establishes nothing.

Waiting for that answer.

Quadaffi wanted Russian protection since his conflicts with Reagan in the 80's, but the Russians said "nyet" to him.

[joshcryer]

57. I never contended that they did. Doesn't change the fact that Russia is imperialist.

Russia is not magically anti-imperialist just because they're "not the west."

[Hart2008]

58. In the Arab world it is the Westerners who are considered the imperialists, not the Russians.

Chechnya is considered to be a part of Russia and that is not disputed internationally. You are changing the subject. Whatever ambitions Russia has in its "near abroad" doesn't change the fact that the U.S. and other Western powers have been aggressively attempting regime change in Arab countries with oil. Thus it is the Western powers which the Arabs consider imperialist, and not the Russians.

An imperialist Russia would never have permitted the original UN resolutions to begin with, but they weren't anti-imperialist, in the eyes of many Arabs, because they permitted the NATO action to proceed. The fact is that the Russians have been neutral in the matter. That neutrality was probably bought with some quid pro quo in other areas of Russian interest.

[joshcryer]

59. The rebels are anti-imperialist. Gaddafi was a CIA lackey and pro-imperialism.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/03/world/africa/03libya.html?pagewanted=all

[Hart2008]

60. Bullshit! The anti-Gaddafi coalition includes defectors from the regime and Jihadists.

Libya is a large, artificial nation with about 140 tribes and a multitude of regional, social, ethnic, and religious divisions. There is no democratic heritage upon which to draw. Gaddafi established a unique form of personal rule that left few institutions -- civic, political, or government.

The anti-Gaddafi coalition includes defectors from the regime, liberals dedicated to building a democratic society, members of long mistreated eastern tribes, western Berbers, and violent jihadists who fought the U.S. No surprise, wrote Phyllis Bennis of the Institute for Policy Studies, the TNC is "already facing significant and sometimes lethal division within its ranks."

The unsolved murder of Gen. Abdel Fattah Younes, formerly the top rebel commander, could be a harbinger of bloodier times to come. Reported the New York Times: "A week after rebels broke into Col. Moammar Gaddafi's former stronghold, much of its territory remains divided into fiefs, each controlled by quasi-independent brigades representing different geographic areas of the country. And the spray paint they use to mark their territory tells the story of a looming leadership crisis in the capital, Tripoli."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/doug-bandow/victory-in-libya-no-model_b_943222.html

The presence of former Quadaffi regime members at the top of the rebel army, indicates that this was a coup, and not a revolution.
Whatever deals that Quadaffi made with the CIA and other intelligence organizations were in mutually beneficial.

[joshcryer]

64. Grasping at straws. They won't allow NATO troops, bases, and won't renegotiate oil contracts.

Effectively they are telling NATO to fuck off once this thing is over. Meanwhile you are championing an article that is advocating ground troop invasion of Libya and bemoaning the fact that the Libyan people did not want fight a ground war with NATO troops, and tanks, and logistics, and so on. What a hilarious bit of rhetoric here to try to win the argument.

[Hart2008]

67. Bullshit! They arlready allowed NATO troops and aircraft in. NT

[joshcryer]

68. Not to any occupation extent.

The secret forces and small groups of intelligence forces are even keeping themselves hidden from the rebels.

[tabatha]

87. There are no NATO boots on the ground in Libya.

There are advisers from the countries of UK and France in a separate capacity from NATO. And, where "boots on the ground" means fighting forces, the advisers are not fighting forces.

[Hart2008]

92. And the farmer took another load away! nt

[tabatha]

28. I visit an AJE blog on Libya every day for the last two months.

Libyans post there now and again.

I would say that the contents of your post are complete and utter BS.

[Hart2008]

34. AJE is run by the Qataris. It isn't very credible on this story.

Since the Qatari flag was flying over that palace in Tripoli, and AJE never discussed that issue, I conclude AJE is not completely credible here.

That is not to say that the rebels don't have some Libyan support, but we aren't getting the whole story from the MSM. Just remember Johnson escalated U.S. combat involvement in Vietnam after the fictional Gulf of Tonkin incident. (Vietnam has oil fields.) Bush used 9-11 and the fictional weapons of mass destruction in Iraq to justify an invasion. The truth isn't important when very wealthy people want to start a war. When there are oil contracts at stake, the truth becomes very hard to find.

I would say that you are very gullible.

[tabatha]

81. AJE blogs are not run by Qatar.

The posters are from all over the world, and they post articles from all press from all over the world.
Did you not read that I stated LIBYANS posted on that blog. The blog is totally un-moderated by AJE.

Once again, you do not know what you are talking about, and make judgments and accusations on your opinion rather than fact.

BTW, here is a video you should watch - if you are open minded to do so.
http://youtu.be/z41kQvx4uKw

And if there were so few in opposition to Gaddafi, why would they have arrested 75,000 political activists. And why have they just killed 800 in the past 3 days in Sirte.

I feel very very sorry for you - because instead of reading everything there is to read about Libya, you base your opinion on one person's account.

Here is one non-Libyan's account:

A few people – all of them with far more experience of Libya than me – have shared their experiences of living in or visiting Libya. I went there for 2 weeks in 2007. I was struck how, apart from public monuments, things looked run down for a country with such an allegedly high standard of living. In the east, particularly Benghazi, this was even more so, with dilapidated buildings, ruts in the roads, and a pretty bad sewage problem near the seashore. Getting to Tobruk, the situation was even worse, with the roads off the main highway in a pretty sorry state. The only place where things were different was Sirt, with shiny new monuments to Gaddafi and the Green Book, and obviously recent investment. Anywhere Gaddafi didn’t like clearly didn’t get any investment (and in those places didn’t get any rubbish collection either)

The other thing that struck me was how friendly and welcoming the Libyans all were UNTIL any of us naïve foreigners mentioned Gaddafi or the state system. Then they looked terrified in case someone was listening.

and another:

Azizor..though I am not Libyan, except with a BIG part of my heart, Tripoli used to by my home for several years..and no I did not live the typical expat compound life but know ample Libyan's and their normal life...and -unfortuantely- can only confirm what you are saying about the lack of infrastruture in Libya.
As soon as you are a few kilometers away from where the tourist cruise ships anchor, where around the green square the roads are indeed fine and the park pretty, many streets have huge wholes nobody bothers to fill or are just dirt tracks. When something is broken e.g. water pipes to a house it usually is the owner who asks people to open the street and fix it, as waiting for the government company to do it can easily take up to 2 years. Yes there is officially free medical treatment..but you get what you pay for and anybody who can afford it rather goes to one of the international hospitals or went to TUnisia for more serious things. And though it is a country with 2000 km beach front there is only a patch of maybe 200 m 'arranged' as a family beach in Tripoli. While several, if not all of his kids have HUUUUGE beach properties for their private parties, - with sand which got shipped from god knows where because the coast around Tripoli doesn'T offer white enough sand - But mostly they weren'T anyway in L but preferring to party in Europe.
And one of the first things I learned, when naively speaking out G'S name on my first arrival to Libya was to never say his name, because even sthg completely harmless could easily bring you in trouble if overheard by the 'Wrong' people.
There are ample more 'anekdotes' I could tell about the normal life in Tripoli, which for a 'westerne'r make your head shake in disbelieve but most importantly let me tell you that the Libyans I met were all very friendly, welcoming, warmhearted and dignified people and I hope that hopefully soon Tripoli will be home again...this time being allowed to say what ever I want.. insallah

When the books about Libya, and the facts about Libya start coming out, I hope you will have the presence of mind to feel embarrassed.

[Hart2008]

89. You are niave. Try denouncing the King in Jordan, audi Arabia or anywhere in MENA..

I've spent time in the Middle East, and I base my opinion on years of studying the region and more than one source for my news. In short, these countries are known for corruption and the rule of "wasta", connections and influence, and not laws. There is requirement of politeness in Arab society, and denouncing the king is always a crime every where. Our allies in this region are all guilty of the same kind of things, and worse.

In Saudi Arabia they have public executions in the main square on Fridays. Those executed are almost always Asian workers to poor to pay the blood money to ransom their lives. Saudi employers keep their workers passports like the Russian mafia, and these workers can't leave the country without permission from their employers. If the employee leaves without completing the contract, it is a crime.

They import domestic help from poor Asian countries and abuse them. These workers get beat by their employers, and it is not uncommon for the Asian house maids to get raped. The abuse has been so bad that Saudi Arabia has had diplomatic troubles lately with the Philippines and Malaysia, as the later two countries won't let their people come to work in KSA now. Yet, MSM ignore those stories unless a Westerner is involved, which is almost never now. Westerners get sent home quietly when there is trouble. You could read about these stories on arabnews.com, but that would require broadening your reading, which also has anti-Western editorials on Libya.

Libya is a tribal society. Those tribes which had it better under Quadaffi are unlikely to be happy with less than they had previously. So the "rebels" need previous Quadaffi loyalists with connections to these tribes to keep the peace during the "revolution", but once Quadaffi loyalists are kept in the new government, then it isn't much of a revolution is it? With many of the same leaders at the top, it appears to be more of coup than a revolution:

It took the greatest military alliance in history five months to push the Libyan rebels across the finish line. Nevertheless, Western politicians are claiming victory.

Yet the ultimate consequences of allied intervention remain uncertain. While few mourn the demise of "the Colonel," liberal democracy may not result in Libya.

Libya was yet another unnecessary war of choice. America would have been more secure had U.S. forces stayed home.

When President Barack Obama intervened in Libya's civil war he could point to no discernible American security interest. Moammar Gaddafi was an unpleasant dictator, but until March he had been feted by the West for abandoning his nuclear program and combating Islamic extremism. Indeed, Gaddafi became a poster child for cooperation with Washington.

There is still more to come on the history of the "revolution" in Libya. Like in Iraq, removing the capstone on the country will only unleash violence and chaos, but perhaps that was the goal.

[tabatha]

90. God, you are misinformed.

I am quite aware of what goes on in Saudi Arabia, and Jordan, etc. Where did I say anything about them previously, and what do they have to do with Libya? You are obfuscating.

Libya is NOT a tribal society.

They will not be keeping people with blood on their hands in the government.

But, they will not be kicking people out - so as NOT to repeat what happened in Iraq. Until elections.

The Transitional National Council is just that TRANSITIONAL. Every one of them has stated that they will not run for election. The people will decide who is in the future government.

The Western politicians are bending over backwards to say that the Libyans responsible for their victory. Did you not listen to the conference yesterday.

The arrogance of your ignorance is astonishing.

And yes, the Libyan action had nothing to do with US security - it was a humanitarian intervention under R2P.

On edit:

And BTW, NATO forces used represented only between 3-5% of their total forces. So, it "It took the greatest military alliance in history five months" is also poppycock.

Also the word is naive.

[Hart2008]

91. 'Tis you who is misinformed. Inshallah, you will see the truth sometime. nt

[sabrina 1]

33. Good question! Lots of money and weapons supplied

by Kuwait and Qatar according to reports. Why was that flag flying there? No one seems to know!

[joshcryer]

41. I know the narrative that was attempted is dishonest.

Other pictures after the Gaddafi sign is completely torn down show that the flag is no longer there. It is very likely Qatari's were with the rebels when they took it.

[Hart2008]

61. Undeniably, the largest flag flying over the caputured palace is Qatari, and not Libyan!

Someone wants to argue about the timing of the two pictures to change the topic from the extent of the Qatari involvement in what is purported to be a Libyan revolution. Any Qatari arms or military personnel was a violation of U.N. resolutions.

[joshcryer]

71. You posted a falsity, I corrected it. The flag has since been removed.

Qatar's involvement is fully supported by UN Resolution 1973, and is no more controversial than UK's involvement or, even more sinister, France's arm drops. Qatar at least has only provided flak jackets and it is rumored small groups of special forces or intelligence training.

Meanwhile the rebels represent a popular uprising, and indeed, this discussion is over. You posted a falsehood and you lack the self-respect to apologize for it or at the bare minimum admit you were wrong.

[Hart2008]

75. Of course the flag was removed. It is very embarrasing to have a revolution under a foreign flag!nt

[joshcryer]

76. Sure it is.

Your contempt for the rebels is astounding. I'm done with you. Have the last word, because I can't take trying to have a discussion with one so patently dishonest in every way.

[Hart2008]

79. Thanks for proving my point!

And you did miss the point of all of this, indeed.

[joshcryer]

36. Your "later picture" has a Gaddafi propaganda sign. Gone in "before."

Obviously the other way around, dude.

[Hart2008]

44. Right, from after Reagan bombed that palace in 1986. Read history much?

Obviously, you are very, very confused about the history of that palace.

Quadaffi used that bombing to rally domestic support against foreigners, hence the sign there.

Dude, go buy a clue!

[joshcryer]

45. How am I confused? I'm not peddling false before and after pictures.

The Qatar flag is gone in much later pictures, but it was not the first of the flags to arrive there as was the attempted false narrative. It's laughable, really.

[Hart2008]

46. Support your assertions with photographic evidence and give sources. NT

[joshcryer]

48. Uh, you have provided the evidence for me in post #22.

The picture you claim is before has more graffiti and a pro-Gaddafi sign is torn down.

In the "after" picture the Graffiti on the building is gone (with perhaps some on the golden fist), and the sign is not completely torn down.

For your dishonest narrative to be 'true' you would have to show us that the rebels scrubbed the building of Graffiti and partially hung back up a pro-Gaddafi sign. That is preposterous.

[joshcryer]

42. Also, significantly more graffiti in your "before" picture than "after."

What a sad display, instantly disproven by anyone who actually looks at your false evidence.

[Hart2008]

47. The before picture is of lower resolution, thus less visible graffiti. You are clearly biased.

Provide your own photos from credible sources to prove your point.

Sad indeed.

[joshcryer]

50. That's nonsense, the Graffiti on the left column is visible even at a very low resolution.

Does not change the fact that the pro-Gaddafi sign would have had to have been partially hung back up by the rebels.

[Hart2008]

53. More graffiti is visible on the after photo, right colomn, and is visible at low resolution.

Your comments about "pro-Qadaffi" signs are typically not supported.

[joshcryer]

56. Patently dishonest, please apologize for trying to mislead me.

Or just scuffle away. Up to you.

[Hart2008]

62. Wow! You found a photo on the Internet! Now address the extent of the illegal Qatari involvement!

I'm waiting for the Arabic translation of the posters in the photo to prove they are "pro Quadaffi", but there is a blue poster on the right pillar for sure that isn't there in the other photo.

The larger issue is the illegal arms and military support from the Qataris in violation of the U.N. resolutions.

Why was the large Qatari flag flying over the Libyan palace in the Libyan capital?

Some revolution!

[joshcryer]

63. Likely a Qatari or a friend of a Qatari hung it. Meanwhile you have no credibility.

Qatar has assisted the rebels, this is no secret, and the rebels are not too embarrassed to fly the flags of states who help them.

[Hart2008]

66. Qatar and Qatari based Al Jazeera (AJE) have no credibility.

And neither do you.

Translate the pro-Quadaffi propaganda for us, again!

[joshcryer]

69. I substantiated everything I have said. You bring untruths and misinformation.

You were patently dishonest with your claims about a picture that you didn't know I'd seen before and was 100% certain that picture had less graffiti.

Meanwhile Al Jazeera is a thousand times better than our local mass media and they are a beacon of truth in the middle east if not the world. Qatar's influence is minimal at best outside of Qatar.

[Hart2008]

72. It wasn't true that the Qatari flag was flying over the palace in Tripoli? That was untrue?

So are the Qataris just the middlemen for the Saudis in this?

What is the real story here?

[joshcryer]

74. It is untrue that your before and after pictures are before and after pictures. You were wrong.

Meanwhile the flag is only in one picture out of many many pictures of the Graffiti at Bab Aziza and your contempt for the Libyan Revolutionaries apparently knows no bounds (who would be so dishonest about such a thing and fail to admit they were wrong?).

[Hart2008]

77. Will they raise the Qatari flag again when they capture Sirte? Will it be the NATO flag this time?nt

[Hart2008]

70. Wow! Libyans fought to raise the Qatari flag over Tripoli! Some patriotic revolution!

What are the Qataris getting for their military help in Libya?

What is the quid pro quo here?

[joshcryer]

73. Oil. What else? It is irrelevant. What did the Libyans do to make you show so much contempt?

Ask for help?

[Hart2008]

78. NO BLOOD FOR OIL! NT

[joshcryer]

65. Meanwhile you can see what appears to be the poster in this video (waiting for apology):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cvzwyu7tXew&feature=player_detailpage#t=201s

:hi:

(What? You actually believed you saw "more" Graffiti in that "before" picture?)

[Starry Messenger]

23. k&r

[malaise]

26. Western governments and their goons are immune from war crimes

apparently

[sabrina 1]

29. Is anyone surprised?

I thought NATO would be gone by now! Why are they still there? Isn't this a 'grass-roots' operation as we have been told?

A war crime about to happen, and I'm sure, fully supported by many on the left. Disgusting. I hope someone intervenes before they start slaughtering innocent people as they are doing in Afghanistan and Pakistan and Yemen etc.

And THIS is why I stopped supporting this 'rebellion'. Unconscionable.

[tabatha]

31. NATO will be gone when Gaddafi has been captured.

[sabrina 1]

32. That's not their mission. Regime Change??

Is there a new UN Resolution I missed?

[joshcryer]

39. "notwithstanding"

Look it up.

[tabatha]

82. Gaddafi loyalists have just killed 800 citiziens in the last 3 days

in Sirte. The only way to stop the killing of civilians is to capture Gaddafi and send him to the Hague.

And BTW, the regime has already changed.

[joshcryer]

38. No, NATO will be gone at the end of Sept when the rest of the cities are liberated.

[CJvR]

80. That has...

...to be one of the slimiest efforts yet to save someone's favorite despot.

[tabatha]

83. So tell me how this a war crime by the rebels.

Bani Walid has just been freed by the rebels without fighting.

Another phone call from Bani Walid: they believe Gaddafi & Son is there. They're bound to their houses and can't leave. They live in terror.
17 hours ago

BaniWalid Latest: a FF from 20 Km north of The city told me cars of happy jubilant families who were trapped passed them by cheering.
14 minutes ago

Apparently, BaniWalid followed the Tripoli example. They rose from within just when FF from Benghazi and Tripoli were few Km on their way.
6 minutes ago

Bani Walid people were trapped by pro-Gaddafi fotces, and they rose up before the FFs reached the outskirts of Bani Walid, and with the FFs freed themselves. Some effing war crime, my ass.

--------------

Sirte - in the last three days, pro-Gaddafi forces have killed 800 people in Sirte - NOW that IS a war crime.

--------------

[rdking647]

84. how far the left has sunk

when they try to come to the defense of a bastard like ghadaffi.

[tabatha]

86. It is heart-breaking.

That is why I migrated to spend half my time on the AJE blogs - where people from all over the world - South Africa, Libya, Denmark, UK, US, Germany, Italy, etc gather to share thoughts, stories and news articles. It is not conformist by a long shot - there have been several arguments across many posts, but there is a far larger streak of reality there. And understanding of the Libyan's situation. The crap that libyans have had to put up with for the last 42 years is well known, but some people choose not to see it.

[Odin2005]

88. There are still few here who defend Robert Mugabe.

[sabrina 1]

93. Yes, like the way they were supporting Saddam Hussein, is that

what you mean? :eyes:

I wonder too about how low some of the 'left' have sunk when they support the Colonial Wars they used to oppose in the ME and Africa. Even using the same tactics the right used when we opposed the Iraq War. What a difference a few years make.

Btw, did you support the invasion of Iraq? Do you support what NATO is doing in Afghanistan and Pakistan? Will you support an invasion by the same suspects of Syria, Iran, Yemen, still on the PNAC list?

Just wondering because I could be misjudging you. Maybe you really are consistent and actually do support the Western Powers invasions of all these countries.

[Hart2008]

94. It is very sad that they don't see the propaganda. Divide and conquer was how the colonialists ruled

They pitted one group against the other domestically, then armed the side that would give them control over the nation's natural resources.

If we were to look closely at the U.S. and Western allies in the region, we would see the same pattern of human rights abuses. We just are very selective in which regimes we scrutinize. How much scrutiny was there of the Mubarek regime before the protests started?

None of the rulers in the MENA are nice, constitutional democrats.

War is an ugly, ugly thing.

How many innocent people will die to replace one corrupt regime with a more Western friendly government?