Amnesty questions claims about Libyan attrocities

[Archean]

Nato leaders, opposition groups and the media have produced a stream of stories since the start of the insurrection on February 15, claiming the Gaddafi regime has ordered mass rapes, used foreign mercenaries and employed helicopters against civilian protesters.

An investigation by Amnesty International has failed to find evidence for these human rights violations and in many cases has discredited or cast doubt on them. It also found indications that on several occasions the rebels in Benghazi appeared to have knowingly made false claims or manufactured evidence.

This being a tech site, the topic is bit off by a mile, but I couldn't resist posting it, just so the readers may at least learn how the 'western corporate' media distorts facts, fabricates baseless allegations, and invent stories to justify what is unjustifiable or rather to cover up their real intentions, that is 'smash and grab' missions to loot all what they can in true imperial style.

Now, having said that this story repeats itself again and again, i.e. these same powers creates puppets like Qaddafi, then once they are of no more use, dispose them off and find new ones.

 

[Benny26]

Gaddafi's always been a crazy despot anyway. Personally, I think we're doing the absalote right thing in Libya.

This being a tech site, the topic is bit off by a mile, but I couldn't resist posting it, just so the readers may at least learn how the 'western corporate' media distorts facts, fabricates baseless allegations, and invent stories to justify what is unjustifiable or rather to cover up their real intentions, that is 'smash and grab' missions to loot all what they can in true imperial style.

So you think that there's no justifiable reason why NATO are all over Gaddafi?...You obviously never saw the bombing raids he was running back in early March on crowds of his own people.

Furthermore, the US (the big oil hungry, power hungry regime changer) is practically a no show in Libya now, It's just mainly the UK, France, and a few other smaller countries. And to say a country like the UK would only be after something like oil, would be really wrong; BP, Britain's biggest supplier, has had a seriously good relationship with Gaddafi and his oil for many years.

 

[Archean]

By the way the Benghazi based rebels have 'in written' pledged to give 35% share in oil industry to France (which have led this whole farce). And as is stated in this article there is no evidence of any sort of massacre on scales the media was drum beating. Hence, the so called bombings are also something need to be verified (I wouldn't be surprised if they too turned out to be just as either not on the scale they were told, if not untrue). Also I wouldn't be surprised if other NATO countries have been promised much better 'oil' deals by the way. Besides, the UN resolution never allowed this (therefore, if someone looks at it impartially, they will conclude that it is an illegal war by the west); I doubt very much Russia/China will be duped into such lies again anytime soon for any other country.

Now, let’s take a different example, of allegedly 'more civilized' country called US. How would you defend their illegal 'rendition' raids* and outsourcing torture which have been going on for 10+ years now? Many so called western democratic governments keep quiet just keeping their ultimate master happy.

Gaddafi's always been a crazy despot anyway. Personally, I think we're doing the absalote right thing in Libya.

Gaddafi is/or has always been crazy, but generally he has taken reasonably good care of his people except for those whom he 'perceived' his enemies, but this has been done by other Arab states (fostered by US+west) for decades. Hence, this political upheaval have much deeper roots, put it plainly people want their wish i.e. the country to be run in more 'open' way. Western agenda is rather to find or create another puppet which would let them run the show without any resistance.

*So far over 1,200 such illegal flights carrying detainees has came to light.

 

[Benny26]

The UK was the first to call for action on Gaddaffi, not France (although it is the french that are leading the campain at the moment, due to the fact that the UK no longer has aircraft carriers, if that's what you mean).

Hence, the so called bombings are also something need to be verified (I wouldn't be surprised if they too turned out to be just as either not on the scale they were told, if not untrue).

Verified?...There's reels and reels of footage of Gaddafi's jets pounding and swooping over the major cities in the early days, obviously enough evidence for the UN to sanction a 'no-fly zone', which involves the destruction of military installations and government vehicles, (currently going on at the moment by NATO forces).

Now, let’s take a different example, of allegedly 'more civilized' country called US. How would you defend their illegal 'rendition' raids* and outsourcing torture which have been going on for 10+ years now? Many so called western democratic governments keep quite just keeping their ultimate master happy.

Well, I couldn't defend it, simply because i'm not an American and therefore it's not my argument. But then we all know the US attitute to war: fight fire with fire...trouble is, the US doesn't know when to quit with stuff like that.

Gaddafi is/or has always been crazy, but generally he has taken reasonably good care of his people. Hence, this political upheaval have much deeper roots, put it plainly people want their wish i.e. the country to be run in more 'open' way. Western agenda is rather to find or create another puppet which would let them run the show without any resistance.

I agree, but then again, yeah he was "good" to his people, but when they turned round and said "we want democracy", he sends his jets in on them...Western agenda at wanting a non-resisting puppet can be seen as a good thing; Iraq, for example, is now a reasonably peaceful country.

 

[Archean]

You are right that UK's lack of resources forced it to take a back seat, but I think its intention was to protect its own 'commercial' interests.

The footings of bombings I’ve seen generally were targeting rebels, however, counting out civilian deaths is ridiculous, as recent NATO raids killed so many civilians as well. To be brutally honest and realistic, you cannot eliminate civilian sufferings in wars. Otherwise, you’ll end up having to prosecute Gen P for killing hundreds of civilian in Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen and Pakistan through such NATO raids; now who on earth would or can do that? War is a tool to achieve a political end IMO, whatever that may be.

Regarding Iraq being peaceful, I don’t see that peace lasting, because the foundations of this peace are hollow. Just as Saddam excluded Shias from political power structure, the Shias now excluding the other minorities. IMO as soon as foreign troops get out of Iraq, the country will return to chaos, for it being an un-natural country (now that is another debate to be had just like who actually escalated the WWII).

Lastly, when west plant their puppets in countries like Libya, Iraq, or Afghanistan etc. they forget one very important thing, such arrangements can last only that long, and that period breeds extreme hate amongst the population for not only the ruling elite but for the west, hence, when people eventually do take courage to stand up ……. something like Iran can happen (which again is not an healthy thing). Let me reverse this whole argument, if say UK was in place of Libya, would you want others to interfere and ‘plant’ people to lead your nation?

Personally I would rather see Libyans standing up for themselves, and defeating Qaddafi to take their country without any interference or military intervention. It would be tough struggle, but no government in the world have army big enough to fight with its own people.

 

[Benny26]

I will agree with you on the civilian death toll in regards to NATO, It is very sad. I also do agree that not enough western Generals are brought to court over such matters, not just with wars like Libya. The west can get away with too many mistakes in war, unlike other less developed countries.

Let me reverse this whole argument, if say UK was in place of Libya, would you want others to interfere and ‘plant’ people to lead your nation?

Well first, there's no way the rebels would have stood any chance against Gaddafi, with his air power and ground forces. At least NATO have given them a chance (and also the rebels were calling for NATO themselfs, remember). Of course, i personally, wouldn't want another nation choosing my leader, however, the position of the UK government (unofficially) is that if they can remove Gaddafi from power, they would stand aside so that Libya can hold free and fair elections to choose their own leader (the UN would probably oversee this also). We obviously don't really know what's going to happen untill Gaddafi falls and the missions over. But in fact rebel leaders are right now creating rival political partys to contest such an election (if ever that time comes).

That would be the best outcome from my point of view anyway.

 

[Archean]

I am not sure things will get to that any time soon, as I said earlier, Libya is a tribal society, and tribal rivalries never die. So, once Qaddafi is sent packing, things probably will either i) settle for a short time before getting messier again or ii) stay messy as they are now. It may even result in division of the country, which perfectly suits the west's needs.

Then there is a need of (west to) continuously 'creat enemies' out of thin air, a) to keep their war economy going, as military establishments wield lots of power, whether one admit it or not; b) keeping public attention away from other important things at home. For example, since late 1980s, lots of wars has been fought for some dubious reasons, anyone remember how American administrations ‘lead’ Iraq first to fight with Iranians (who bought billions of $ worth weapons from Israel and still have stomach to malign it) invade Kuwait, and then declare war on Iraq. Yet worst was to 'claim war related expenses' from Kuwaitis and Saudis ...... now that is just good business isn't it?

Now exactly the same objectives (i.e. ensuring resources it needs are under either its control or supply isn't threatened) are met by another superpower (at least economically) i.e. China, they have pretty much crushed the western corporations out of many African countries, and doing the same now in South America; funnily enough they never went to war. From what I have been able to understand, their philosophy is simply business like, avoiding getting into political wrangling’s or shaping policies etc., saves money as well doesn’t it?

Note: when I say west, it mean western leaders / governments, not many folks on the street have enough knowledge to make an informed opinion frankly, so they just follow mindlessly like well ....... sheep.

 

[Benny26]

Well, you could say that countries like the US and the UK were very tribal nations themselfs long ago, and any politcal party roots could easily spawn from that kind of mindset. Maybe there might be a trigger for a more civilized society when the wars over (although i also doubt that very much myself).

Then there is a need of (west to) continuously 'creat enemies' out of thin air, a) to keep their war economy going, as military establishments wield lots of power, whether one admit it or not; b) keeping public attention away from other important things at home. For example, since late 1980s, lots of wars has been fought for some dubious reasons, anyone remember how American administrations ‘lead’ Iraq first to fight with Iranians (who bought billions of $ worth weapons from Israel and still have stomach to malign it) invade Kuwait, and then declare war on Iraq. Yet worst was to 'claim war related expenses' from Kuwaitis and Saudis ...... now that is just good business isn't it?

Well yeah, I'll agree with you there.

When you talk about China: China's one of the most crafty countries in the world, and sadly with its lack of free speech and poor human rights records, one of the most powerful. China really does stand out like a sore thumb though in todays "Ways"...The simple fact of its workload output and the demand placed on it, It is practically untouchable and unmentionable. It will be interesting how China turnes out in the years to come, i think.

 

[Archean]

Well, you could say that countries like the US and the UK were very tribal nations themselfs long ago, and any politcal party roots could easily spawn from that kind of mindset. Maybe there might be a trigger for a more civilized society when the wars over (although i also doubt that very much myself).

Despite being a tribal society, in many ways it is more civilized than many 'perceived to be civilized' countries, trouble starts when people doesn't agree with the rulers and all the norms / ethics are thrown out. But even this is now done in countries I referred to earlier, it seems that somehow people in power no matter where they are, are lot less tolerant to difference of opinion now.

I think one doesn't need to exactly copy / follow western democracy to have a just and equal society, in fact the current political chaos in many of these democracies is because of the way the system can be manipulated by the powerful and wealthy for their own benefit (hence on that argument US is an plutonomy, UK is heading the same way, and Germany is once again preparing to rob Greece in broad day light like they did in the last century, only difference is France is helping them this time around).

Now, Ironically, without China in most probability dollar will collapse, well in a way we live in an interesting era, where one imperial power i.e. US is declining now, and another one is rising.

 

[Benny26]

Despite being a tribal society, in many ways it is more civilized than many 'perceived to be civilized' countries, trouble starts when people doesn't agree with the rulers and all the norms / ethics are thrown out. But even this is now done in countries I referred to earlier, it seems that somehow people in power no matter where they are, are lot less tolerant to difference of opinion now.

One big obstacle around trying to sway or even topple a government in a country like the UK, is the simple fact of working day lives...It really does take time to make your voice be heard in a country like mine, time that people seldom have mainly due to a high employment margin, high fuel and food costs. The media hardly makes any impact because nobody really trusts it (and in turn the government jump on this hard). Even before the Iraq war, over 1 million people (one of the biggest protests in the UK's history) marched on parliament against an invasion...and as we all know, It didn't work.

I think one doesn't need to exactly copy / follow western democracy to have a just and equal society, in fact the current political chaos in many of these democracies is because of the way the system can be manipulated by the powerful and wealthy for their own benefit (hence on that argument US is an plutonomy, UK is heading the same way, and Germany is once again preparing to rob Greece in broad day light like they did in the last century, only difference is France is helping them this time around).

Yep, plenty of manipulating politcal and wealthy scumbags around these parts. I suppose the big area would be tax.

 

[Archean]

Unfortunately not just tax, the financial crash of 2007-08, was instigated by financial gambling at a mega scale by the banks all over the world. I remember reading somewhere that a nurse in new york ended up having five (5) houses mortgaged against her name, simply because these banks artificially created a real estate bubble, whereby, inflating the prices, so when the house of cards fell ....... we all know what happened. But the real issue which I wanted to point out was, these financial institutions then ran to their puppets i.e. elected politicians and scared them into taking debts of these banks onto public balance sheets, in addition to providing them trillion of dollars of funding to spend on .... guest what? More gambling using the same instruments like CDS.

Even more distressing is that these institutions thrive on 'debt creation', as debt creation means they can continue to gamble and their executives will continue to get higher pays + bonuses, all the while nations are being ravaged, the poor folks who work from dawn to dusk just to earn a decent living for their families are virtually being made into slaves.

To summarize this all up, one can simply say that democratic process is a farce, as it has been hi-jacked by several powerful interest groups. They no longer serve the people, protect their rights, and ensure well being of all the population, which is not only disappointing but very distressing as well, especially as you rightfully pointed out, the ordinary citizens are hardly bothered about this whole systematic collapse (in very slow motion).

 

[Benny26]

I get a hint in your voice (or text rather) that it sounds like you've completely given up hope on the democratic process?

Obviously the banking crisis was just a complete shambles, but hey it happened, we all got panned, now things are moving on. You gotta have faith they sort it out and don't let the car slip down that road again or otherwise.....What the hell can you do?

Run for president or prime minster maybe?

 

[Archean]

The problem is, moving on will not help. Because the banks are back to doing what they were doing in the early part of previous decade. As I said earlier this whole farce is based upon one principle i.e. debt creation so they can make money out of it. Now, do you think giving more debt to already debt burdened will solve any problem? I do not. Anyway, its a boring debate (economics are always boring ) .... Case in point Iceland, Ireland, Greece, Portugal etc. By the way I am still hoping that Greek people will stand up, and deliver a crushing blow to Papandreau (wtf I don't know spellings of his stupid name) Govt., in fact, there is a possibility that if things really start to get out of hands, military coup may take place there, which may be a good thing.

By the way, at least Brits have done one smart thing, i.e. they never bothered to join the Euro

Now that is more like it, if only people like us would step in the arena and push all those lunatics out ... the issue is not many people find the courage to stand up and take this difficult road.

Edit:
Oh and I forgot to mention the biggest contradiction in 'capitalism driven economies (mainly US)' i.e. the military is run in truly 'socialist' ways, everything is subsidized or free. Now, why on earth the right wing politicians which jump up and down (as if someone have lighted something in their *****#$) for any such facility for ordinary citizens (e.g. medicare?).

 

[Benny26]

I strongly think Greece will go down, I would bet my cat on it. What you say's bang on the money: Creating debt to pay off other debt, is a sad paradox that has very sharp teeth (and alot of people, just like countries, know that well)

What's a slap in the face for Greece from the UK, is that we have a bigger debt than them (but obviously our economy is stronger...and yes you are right, It's boring )

Not joining the Euro is a very big thing for us. I hope we never join it, just on sentimental value alone.

Now that is more like it, if only people like us would step in the arena and push all those lunatics out ... the issue is not many people find the courage to stand up and take a stand.

:grinthumb:

 

[Archean]

It is irrelevant whether Greece goes down or not, whats actually relevant is that Greeks should throw out their crooked government, probably send all those corrupt politicians to some jails in Israel, and announce that they will only pay all the debts in drachma and tell Germany, France and Dutch to ***k off. As these countries are waging economic terrorism against poor European nations.

 

[LinkedKube]

The U.S is in enough trouble as it is. I think we need to stop policing the world so much. I do understand situations of tyranny but we spend enough money in Afghanistan.

 

[Archean]

Perfectly said super, the poor and the jobless at home are what they need to take care, but I doubt it very much that they will. In fact the way the US establishment is 'looting' (sorry don't know any softer word here) public's resources is beyond belief, I remember there was some military project whose original cost was in few billion dollars but it was escalated to tens of billions in just few years time. And guess what, the senior military officer incharge of that project upon his retirement was hired by ............ the same military hardware contractor(s) who was involved in the project. Now if you bifurcate actual cost from the perceived overhead cost, you'll be astonished to see how on earth such high profits are being made.

 

[Benny26]

It is irrelevant whether Greece goes down or not, whats actually relevant is that Greeks should throw out their crooked government, probably send all those corrupt politicians to some jails in Israel, and announce that they will only pay all the debts in drachma and tell Germany, France and Dutch to ***k off. As these countries are waging economic terrorism against poor European nations.

If Greece goes down, the Euro single currency will suffer a big blow (plus a few economys, like the UK's because of import/exports)...and probably in any aftermath, Greece may well end up back on their own currency, which many people (like yourself) believe can only be a good thing.

Greece are already protesting like mad trying to bring down the government...Personally, I think it will only be a matter of time.

I think Greece going down could be really relevant, because all those things what you said they should do...may very well come around because of that downfall.

Supermashbrada said:
The U.S is in enough trouble as it is. I think we need to stop policing the world so much. I do understand situations of tyranny but we spend enough money in Afghanistan.

This could be the closest reason why the US arn't that much in Libya...Obama's no *****, in my opinion.

 

[SNGX1275]

I didn't read everything in your discussion, so perhaps I missed it. But I did see where someone said the rebels in Libya didn't stand a chance. Well, they did, in the early days of the rebellion it seemed they were pretty close to winning. They seemingly caught the leaders off guard I guess. But then, the rest of the world sat around and did nothing (which IMO is fine, its their battle not "ours"). And then slowly the rebels started losing, well, maybe not slowly because it seemed to deteriorate fairly quickly. Then, as the rebels were on the edge of defeat, the "west" stepped in.

IMO, WTF? If the west was going to get involved, they needed to right away, it seemed like the rebels would have won if they just had a little help. Waiting for them to get beaten up for weeks just allowed time enough for everyone to die. Many (all?) of those people that died were the ones responsible for making so much progress in the early days, once they are gone the rebel force has lost a major portion of their skilled fighters.

 

[Benny26]

It was me who said the rebels on their own didn't have a chance, and i still stand by it.

The rebels never made it to the military hub and capitol, Tripoli; and as we all saw unfold on the news, no chance of even getting within 10 miles of it. Close, from my point of view was just an illusion.

The very fact that the 'west' waited as long as they did proves the fact that the rebels had no chance. I mean, you said it yourself, they were on the edge of defeat. Would you really bet they could have come back from the position they were in just before NATO got involved?...

 

[SNGX1275]

No, and that was my point. Without NATO it would be over. But I also think if NATO would have gotten involved right away it would also be over, with the rebels winning. Perhaps you are right though, the media in the west seems untrustworthy.

 

[Archean]

My whole arguments has been aimed at the 'real motives' behind this new war; especially since this insane person has been supported by the west for so long. Second issue which we ended up talking about was the disconnect between the people on the street and facts, hence, this lack of knowledge mean people are in no position to a) understand how politicians and media misguide them, b) real motives of such facical* wars.

* Because people like Qaddafi (before him Saddam + Mubarak etc.) are propped up by the west, and once they are of no mmore use, they are swiftly disposed off by 'fabricating' or sometimes 'engineering' conditions for a change, wherein, a new puppet is installed to serve the interests.

 

[Benny26]

I completely understand and agree with what you're saying here, Archean...But looking at alternatives and seperate outcomes, I don't think i would want it any other way.

The further south (through Africa) or East (through Asia) in general you travel, the more freedoms and practices we all take for granted disappear; democracy, free speech (within context), press freedom, equal rights for women, equal rights for gays, fair and just law, the right to a fair trial, ect...

I would much rather it be us playing puppetmaster than any of the so called 'victim' countrys. Sometimes you've got to consider yourself lucky that the USA is as big and powerfull as it is.

 

[Archean]

You are positively correct on most points, but I think the real result of such 'continuation of politics through war' actually alienate the populations in the longer run, creating such hatred and anger which lasts for generations. Eventually when people do eventually rise up against such regimes the results usually mean that the masters are the biggest losers. But any way, fact of the matter is, power has its own way of expressing itself, so as long as it lasts the imperial mindset stays, once it is lost, well the new cycle begins with new empire and new faces.

 

[Benny26]

Yeah, maybe you're right. One of the great examples for me though, was the Roman invasion of Britain over a millennium ago. The Roman's brought things to Britain that we had never had before, things even todays modern countries don't have, i.e. democracy, a more civilized society (and a proper sewer system )...These things stuck long after the Roman's were booted out.

Granted, the world today is a very different place though.