Colonel Gaddafi Is killed

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Thu Oct 20, 2011 2:07 pm

Confirmed Gaddafi dead: Colonel Gaddafi killed in cold blood begging for his life - mirror.co.uk

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Thu Oct 20, 2011 2:10 pm

A disgusting display of barbaric baying for blood.

Post by **spot** » Thu Oct 20, 2011 2:13 pm

You've not seen enough lies from the rag-tag rebels to disregard blatant propaganda like "begging for his life"? What else do you expect people like that to tell the press. All you can tell from the recorded material is that the Colonel was taken alive and was then murdered. I see no reason to add insult to injury.

CARLA · Post by **CARLA** » Thu Oct 20, 2011 3:37 pm

Not sure he was begging for his life but it appears from where they found him he was on the run at least. I never thought he would be taken alive to hated the rebels wanted him dead.

Post by **spot** » Thu Oct 20, 2011 3:49 pm

On the run perhaps, holed up undoubtedly, what he wasn't is fleeing which is the pejorative term the BBC has used all day.

Snooz · Post by **Snooz** » Thu Oct 20, 2011 4:08 pm

What's the difference between "on the run" and "fleeing"?

Post by **spot** » Thu Oct 20, 2011 4:26 pm

SnoozeAgain;1373147 wrote: What's the difference between "on the run" and "fleeing"?

On the run surely only implies avoiding capture. Fleeing involves running away. I could dig formal definitions out if you like.

Scrat · Post by **Scrat** » Thu Oct 20, 2011 4:33 pm

Well I hate to see it end this way but then again I didn't expect much more. I not going to worry about the colonel, his time is past. I am going to worry about the people of Libya. I suspect the vultures are on their final approach by now, some have already landed no doubt. :-5

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Thu Oct 20, 2011 4:33 pm

SnoozeAgain;1373147 wrote: What's the difference between "on the run" and "fleeing"?

The difference is very subtle.

Run away from home. I wouldn't flee home but If my home was on fire I would flee the fire.

Snooz · Post by **Snooz** » Thu Oct 20, 2011 4:38 pm

spot;1373149 wrote: On the run surely only implies avoiding capture. Fleeing involves running away. I could dig formal definitions out if you like.

Definition of FLEE

intransitive verb

1

a : to run away often from danger or evil : fly b : to hurry toward a place of security

flopstock · Post by **flopstock** » Thu Oct 20, 2011 4:48 pm

It's kinda hard to portray this guy as a coward when you look at how long he stayed and fought. It's been months and wasn't he offered other countries to leave to safely?

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Thu Oct 20, 2011 7:37 pm

Gaddafi dead: Dictator begged for his life before being summarily executed | Mail Online

WARNING... THIS ARTICLE SHOWS GRAPHIC FOOTAGE OF HIS LAST MINUTES BEFORE BEING EXECUTED

This Is just sick sick sick.

These rebels talked of Gaddafi's brutal regime and the reason to over-throw him, yet here they are resorting to that of which they accused.

Barbaric animals !!!

He needed to be tried for war crimes. At lease then, maybe the truth would have come out as to the Wests deals with him for oil etc etc.

Now we are going to have Cameron crowing about freeing the Lybian people.

This absolutely smacks of the persuit of Sadam Hussain and Bin Laden.

The subsequent videos of Obama, Hillary and Americans cheering are the best recruiting tools for the next 9/11s.

Scrat · Post by **Scrat** » Thu Oct 20, 2011 8:07 pm

I wonder what would have came out of a trial in the Hague. Nobody is going to tell me he was all bad, all you have to do is look around. I wonder who is next? King Hussein of Syria? I really think that conflict is going to get worse. Syria is a tribal society also.

Snooz · Post by **Snooz** » Thu Oct 20, 2011 8:38 pm

oscar;1373162 wrote: Gaddafi dead: Dictator begged for his life before being summarily executed | Mail Online

WARNING... THIS ARTICLE SHOWS GRAPHIC FOOTAGE OF HIS LAST MINUTES BEFORE BEING EXECUTED

This Is just sick sick sick.

These rebels talked of Gaddafi's brutal regime and the reason to over-throw him, yet here they are resorting to that of which they accused.

Barbaric animals !!!

He needed to be tried for war crimes. At lease then, maybe the truth would have come out as to the Wests deals with him for oil etc etc.

Now we are going to have Cameron crowing about freeing the Lybian people.

This absolutely smacks of the persuit of Sadam Hussain and Bin Laden.

The subsequent videos of Obama, Hillary and Americans cheering are the best recruiting tools for the next 9/11s.

Link please. I did a brief search and didn't find a single photo of either Obama or Clinton "cheering". I'd be interested in seeing the videos.

Snooz · Post by **Snooz** » Thu Oct 20, 2011 8:49 pm

Analysis: Reactions to Gaddafi's death - Features - Al Jazeera English

koan · Post by **koan** » Thu Oct 20, 2011 9:06 pm

The US just had an American citizen assassinated so... who's to judge?

theia · Post by **theia** » Fri Oct 21, 2011 3:02 am

I chose not to look at the last pictures of Gaddafi. But earlier I was stood in a queue at M and S, awaiting my turn and staring idly into the middle distance and realised I was staring right at all the tabloid images on a newspaper display.:-5

Post by **spot** » Fri Oct 21, 2011 3:20 am

theia;1373177 wrote: I chose not to look at the last pictures of Gaddafi. But earlier I was stood in a queue at M and S, awaiting my turn and staring idly into the middle distance and realised I was staring right at all the tabloid images on a newspaper display.:-5

Standards have slipped. I don't recall this rash of voyeuristic corpse-shots after the Ceausescus' execution. Perhaps Western news editors think Arab lives don't count for much, thereby following the lead of Israel and America's political class.

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Fri Oct 21, 2011 4:27 am

Gaddafi has been in power since 1969, what we hear on the News over here cannot touch the events within the country, mirrored by the anger of the men participating in the graphic pictures we have seen.

Must agree barbaric scenes, but perhaps with some reason, mobs are a law unto themselves, not an excuse, just a possible explanation.

Must agree with Spot about the broadcasting of such footage, even with the warnings, not long ago a few images would have been shown, not the whole sorry episode.

Post by **spot** » Fri Oct 21, 2011 5:50 am

Bruv;1373180 wrote: mobs are a law unto themselves, not an excuse, just a possible explanation.Perhaps the rebels should at least drop their pretentious claim to the slightly more dignified title of "Army" then. Heavily armed rabble with close air support courtesy of their Capitalist paymasters, that covers them adequately I'd have thought.

Post by **spot** » Fri Oct 21, 2011 5:54 am

SnoozeAgain;1373152 wrote: Definition of FLEE

intransitive verb

1

a : to run away often from danger or evil : fly b : to hurry toward a place of security
You're at least capturing the distinction I'm trying to make, that the Colonel was dug into a defensible position for a last-ditch stand rather than on the move.

CARLA · Post by **CARLA** » Fri Oct 21, 2011 7:09 am

Mob mentality is ugly and you saw it with the brutal death of Gaddafi who by all accounts deserved everything bit of it. This was an awful evil man who in the end died probably just like the people he tortured and killed over the years. "What goes around comes around" evil is always put down eventually. I think this man was as crazy as they come or might have been starting to show signs of dementia his confusion when captured makes me wonder he wss 69.

Snooz · Post by **Snooz** » Fri Oct 21, 2011 7:12 am

spot;1373183 wrote: You're at least capturing the distinction I'm trying to make, that the Colonel was dug into a defensible position for a last-ditch stand rather than on the move.

Actually, you just contradicted yourself. But that's fine if it makes you feel better.

Post by **spot** » Fri Oct 21, 2011 7:20 am

CARLA;1373188 wrote: Mob mentality is ugly and you saw it with the brutal death of Gaddafi who by all accounts deserved everything bit of it.No, Carla, not "by all accounts". By accounts in the Western media perhaps. Colonel Gaddafi was a hero of the anti-Capitalist movement, a radical socialist whose society Western governments have attempted to steal for profit over the last third of a century and have now finally succeeded. The world needs at least a few idealist leaders of his stature. The fact that he can be traduced by your newspaper and TV companies doesn't make him a villain, it just shows the power of propaganda when consumed by the willing.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Fri Oct 21, 2011 7:22 am

SnoozeAgain;1373170 wrote: Link please. I did a brief search and didn't find a single photo of either Obama or Clinton "cheering". I'd be interested in seeing the videos.

Clinton on Qaddafi: "We came, we saw, he died" - Political Hotsheet - CBS News

It was all over Fox news In the early hours of this morning. Scroll down the article for video of Clinton.

Post by **spot** » Fri Oct 21, 2011 7:23 am

SnoozeAgain;1373190 wrote: Actually, you just contradicted yourself. But that's fine if it makes you feel better.

Only if you think "on the run" implies movement rather than continued resistance. I'd say the chief aspect of "on the run" is continued freedom despite close pursuit.

CARLA · Post by **CARLA** » Fri Oct 21, 2011 7:28 am

Propoganda, new it will always be the same doesn't matter who the leader is. I look to the people he ruled nothing else this man was a a tryant and his people wanted him gone dead or alive and in the end it was dead.

Post by **spot** » Fri Oct 21, 2011 7:36 am

CARLA;1373195 wrote: Propoganda, new it will always be the same doesn't matter who the leader is. I look to the people he ruled nothing else this man was a a tryant and his people wanted him gone dead or alive and in the end it was dead.

I don't think you can justify that statement. A lot of people in the pay of destabilizing Western agencies, with overwhelming access to Western air superiority, have defeated the armed forces of Libya. Nobody in Libya supportive of Colonel Gaddafi's revolutionary government is in a position to stand up and say so at the moment so you can't expect to hear their version of events. I have nothing against tyranny either, it can and often is benevolent, and in this instance I feel on balance that it was. What wealth Libya managed to accrue despite decades of Capitalist sanctions was available to the whole of Libyan society, not just a trivial proportion of seriously rich fat cats.

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Fri Oct 21, 2011 10:45 am

Spot can you define the 'Tyranny, that you have nothing against.

I am not a great follower of middle eastern affairs, but my recollection of events puts Gaddafi at least complicit in both Lockerbie and Yvonne Fletcher's death.

Post by **spot** » Fri Oct 21, 2011 1:46 pm

Bruv;1373223 wrote: Spot can you define the 'Tyranny, that you have nothing against.

I am not a great follower of middle eastern affairs, but my recollection of events puts Gaddafi at least complicit in both Lockerbie and Yvonne Fletcher's death.
I had Gelon in mind when I used the word.

I doubt Lockerbie.

Your Prime Minister said this week he was proud of what the UK had achieved in Libya this year. presumably he meant our complicity in killing over fifty thousand Libyans and he can't doubt the deaths he's caused. He can't believe the previous 42-year government came close to killing that number of people, however many Yvonne Fletchers you throw into the mix. He is devoid of moral integrity, he's merely applied deadly force for what he mistakenly considers to be a national interest, ditching every aspect of International law relating to the internal affairs of sovereign nations in the process. He's no better than Tony Blair.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Fri Oct 21, 2011 2:14 pm

Muammar Gaddafi's 'trophy' body on show in Misrata meat store | World news | The Guardian

Vile just vile

Besides... This so called freedom Libya now has. I can see more trouble now and In the Immediate future than the reign of Gaddaffi. There Is no democracy In Libya and no elections. Already warring rebel fractions are disputing who takes over. I believe the rebel fractions will turn on each other In a bid for power and the civil war will continue.

The US have announced today that with the death of Gaddaffi, their work In Libya Is over. What are the US going to do if rebel fractions start another civil war?

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Fri Oct 21, 2011 4:23 pm

spot;1373238 wrote: I had Gelon in mind when I used the word.

I doubt Lockerbie.

Your Prime Minister said this week he was proud of what the UK had achieved in Libya this year. presumably he meant our complicity in killing over fifty thousand Libyans and he can't doubt the deaths he's caused. He can't believe the previous 42-year government came close to killing that number of people, however many Yvonne Fletchers you throw into the mix. He is devoid of moral integrity, he's merely applied deadly force for what he mistakenly considers to be a national interest, ditching every aspect of International law relating to the internal affairs of sovereign nations in the process. He's no better than Tony Blair.

I had forgotten Gelon (trying to sound intellectual)........why did you not say tyranny in the mode of Gelon then ? So we could all get what you were talking about ?

But forgetting what your mind throws up...........you haven't , with respect, answered the question, or is that it? Tyranny ala Gelon is OK.............what about tyranny ala Gadaffi ?

How can you 'doubt' Lockerbie ?

It is on the map, the event that the shorthand 'Lockerbie' is used to point to, actually happened, I have seen the pictures.

'My Prime Minister' ? was never in my query. Unless you can forget the misdeeds of one person because of the misdeeds of another.

By the same token presumably Hitler and Mugabe are paragons for their best intentions and overlook their faults ?

Before the west became involved, Libyans were rebelling, or do you see the whole so called Arab Spring as western inspired and financially backed ?

Scrat · Post by **Scrat** » Sat Oct 22, 2011 7:45 am

The fact that he can be traduced by your newspaper and TV companies doesn't make him a villain, it just shows the power of propaganda when consumed by the willing.

Bravo. Pat yourself on the back for that one Spot.

Scrat · Post by **Scrat** » Sat Oct 22, 2011 8:06 am

I look to the people he ruled nothing else this man was a a tryant and his people wanted him gone dead or alive and in the end it was dead.

If you look at a population is this situation you will see certain moods. Certain predispositions amongst the population. Some portion is against the other side, some are for it. These 2 groups tend to be small in number, the vast majority care little for the goings on around them and are usually content with their lot in life.

If you look into it you will find that in Libya 12 months ago the country was not in the best of times. All the basics were essentially there in quantity. It's just that there wasn't a lot of opportunity for the young and other discontent members of society. Keep in mind, all of the combatants on the rebels side were only about 10% of the male population. Libyas small army was better equipped and more professional. Were it not for NATO they would have never won.

This was no revolution of the people.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon Oct 24, 2011 4:50 am

British National Party Ideas » Gaddafi Dead: A Spectacle of Double Standards

I could not agree with this more.

Post by **spot** » Mon Oct 24, 2011 5:56 am

Bruv;1373256 wrote: I had forgotten Gelon (trying to sound intellectual)........why did you not say tyranny in the mode of Gelon then ? So we could all get what you were talking about ?

But forgetting what your mind throws up...........you haven't , with respect, answered the question, or is that it? Tyranny ala Gelon is OK.............what about tyranny ala Gadaffi ?

I've already answered that, we're going in circles. What I wrote was "I have nothing against tyranny either, it can and often is benevolent, and in this instance I feel on balance that it was". I think that indicates my view that Gaddafi's was a benevolent tyranny in the manner of Gelon's, supportive of the interests of the population at large. By contrast, the new democracy serves the interests of Western capitalism and a small subset of Libya's new owners who, I have no doubt (and neither, I imagine, do you), are about to enrich themselves beyond the dreams of Croesus. Propagandists have pretended that Gaddafi was self-serving, I think recent events have demonstrated beyond doubt that his entire life has been spent in the service of the revolution. It's too easy for people to lie back and scoff, he put a lot of work into non-alignment. I regret his departure.

How can you 'doubt' Lockerbie ?

It is on the map, the event that the shorthand 'Lockerbie' is used to point to, actually happened, I have seen the pictures.

The event that the shorthand 'Lockerbie' is used to point to, actually happened, but I doubt any Libyan involvement as do many others, not least some of the UK relatives of those who died in the crash. The trial was an outrage of circumstantial evidence and notable for the lies brought forward and sworn on oath to enable a conviction, it was a travesty of justice from which everyone concerned can feel justifiably soiled. It provided a convenient scapegoat, that's all.

Before the west became involved, Libyans were rebelling, or do you see the whole so called Arab Spring as western inspired and financially backed ?I doubt any rebellion occurred before the Benghazi and foreign-based Libyan organizers were funded and agreements in place. The events in Tunisia and in Cairo appear to be internal popular uprisings, those in Libya and Syria don't. I'm not suggesting there was no opposition in either country, merely that Western intelligence agencies have a long track record of subversion and the events in Libya and Syria stink of it.

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Mon Oct 24, 2011 10:29 am

Since the rising started I have found out more about Gaddafi than I knew previously.

I can see why the West might want him gone now.

The most frightening thing is the information is out there, but it doesn't tally with anything that is spoon fed to the masses.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Tue Oct 25, 2011 9:35 am

Bruv;1373360 wrote: Since the rising started I have found out more about Gaddafi than I knew previously.

I can see why the West might want him gone now.

The most frightening thing is the information is out there, but it doesn't tally with anything that is spoon fed to the masses.

Did you see the Panorama Special last night about the ties between Mohamad Moussa Koussa and Tony Blair even Involving MI5?.... Frightening !!!