The most astounding news is coming out of Libya. Two of Moammar Ghadafi’s sons have been captured, the Palace guard have surrendered (as planned, I believe), and no one seems to know the whereabouts of the little tin pot murderous dictator. He most definitely has not been killed, and the photo that appeared on Twitter is a fake. The opposition forces have entered Tripoli, they have taken the base used by the regime’s elite troops, and they have planted the old flag at Green Square. This square has been renamed as Martyr’s square.
The situation with Libya is far more complex than that of Egypt, Tunisia and Syria. The people who formed the opposition came from a more diverse range of individuals. Yes, it is true that there are some individuals who are Islamists. However, it is not possible to totally align them with Al Qaeda. Now that the opposition is well on the way to taking Tripoli, we now enter a very delicate period where it is important to keep Al Qaeda out of Libya’s business. This will only happen if the NATO forces do not enter Libyan territory.
The thing that I have admired the most about those behind the NTC has been their determination to ensure that Libya does not become a second Iraq. To avoid this it is important that they embrace the security forces that had worked for the regime. It is also important that the U.N. avoids sending in any forces in an effort to secure the country.
Any talk of a “fears of a blood bath” is in my view quite premature. Whilst it is true that Libya is made up of various tribes, it is also true that they are homogenous in other ways – they are Libyans and they are majority Muslims, who are Sufi rather than either Shia or Sunni. The Islamists in Libya tend towards the Wahibbi school, and that in itself explains why some have indeed ended up in Iraq to fight. What is more important here is that their struggle has not been on religious grounds, but on political grounds, and there has been a nationalist fervour.
Something that you might not have known about Libya is that Daffy Duck had changed the name of the nation to : “The Socialist Republic of Libya”, aligning the country with Russia, Cuba and Venezuela. However, for at least the people of Benghazi there is no desire to remain a socialist republic. They want a country that operates as a Democracy. These are people who have lived in the West, in countries such as the U.K., the USA and even Australia. They have tasted the democracy of these countries, and that is what they desire for Libya. If they can put together a constitution that enables such a democracy, then more power to them. However, there is no guarantees when it comes to a country that is based upon Islam (Turkey almost made it as a democracy but then Erdogan was elected).
The threats that have been made by Daffy Duck have been hollow. It is true that he placed snipers on the rooftops in Tripoli, and that the snipers were taking pot shots at the citizens. When you read about the more than 300 that were allegedly killed and the more than 1000 wounded in Tripoli, keep in mind that this was not the result of any NATO action, but of Daffy Duck loyalists firing upon their own people. The video footage that I have seen has not shown any shooting violence, instead there has been crowds cheering the opposition forces as they approached Tripoli. Also keep in mind that there was shooting inside the house of Mohammed Gadhafi.
At this point in time the media has not mentioned the whereabouts of Khamis Gadhafi – did he die in Zlitan? Neither has there been any mention of the whereabouts of Saadi Gadhafi, and the exact whereabouts of Daffy Duck is unknown. I think that it is best to ignore any reports that state that three of the Daffy Duck sons are being held, because so far I know of only 2 that have been captured.
Something else that is important here is the context of the people singing out “God is Greatest”. Although we identify this with jihad it is not always the case. During this conflict, there was one incident where a wounded doctor was being stood over by a regime goon (soldier) and the demand was that he acknowledge the greatness of Daffy Duck. The young doctor refused but instead he stated that God is greatest, meaning of course that he owed no such loyalty to Moammar Gadhafi. This is the same kind of context that has to be applied to those Iranians who were shouting from their rooftops as they condemned Khamenei and Ahmanutjob. The context for the Libyans in Tripoli is simply “I believe in God”, and their acknowledgement that God is above man. We know of course that in other circumstances that this context can be distorted. I hope and pray that in the case of the Libyans that they do not take up any jihad against the West.
It is also important to look to the historical context of the whole conflict. In doing so, one gets a hint of the religious background, and especially the loyalty to the former head of Libya, king Idris. This is tied to the Sanusi Army which Idris led during the second world war. The historical context here is that Idris made a deal with the British and the French during the second world war to help defeat the Italians under Mussolini, and in return the British and the French would help liberate them from being a colony of Italy. If you go back in time however, the grandfather of Idris was very much the Islamist, yet Idris was more of a pragmatist. The variant of Islam under the Idris back to his grandfather was the Sanusi school which is a variant of the Sufi Islam, but with a mixture of the Wahibbi school. This historical context helps to explain why those in Benghazi were keen to call upon NATO to help and why they were requesting the implementation of the no-fly zone, but were insisting on a policy of “no foreign boots on the ground” (at least not visible boots). It has not been the USA who have had people within Libya, it has been the French and the British that have provided guidance to the opposition forces, and who helped to spear head this very tricky operation.
At this point in time I am not covering the assassination of General Younes. There are many questions to be asked about that incident, and still more questions to be asked about the loyalties of Younes – was he in fact a spy working for Daffy Duck? This will be a subject at some future date.
A world at war 
William, interesting point about Mr. Potato Head. He is a far more dangerous person than members of the National Transitional Council in Libya.
I have just finished reading an interesting commentary from a journalist in Libya. There are many figures who have been completely out of the limelight until now. I am on a fishing expedition to find out more about all of them.
However, back to el Baradei because he is an interesting character for a very different reason. You picked up a good point about what he claimed. The man was a liar. He is not to be believed at all!! Did you know that his Iranian wife is related to a member of the Iranian regime?
El Baradei sees himself as the next President of Egypt. If that happened you can be certain that there would be an extreme shift in Egypt towards Iran. He is an extremely dangerous man.
What I find intriguing is that the Israeli government is accepting of the changes in Libya. I will be watching to see if the new Libyan transitional government make any overtures towards Israel. What I have discovered is that the late King Idris was not against Israel and was pro-west, even though he was an Islamist.
LikeLike
Aussie,
I agree whole kindheartedly about Elbaradei, he is not only dangerous, but a manipulative lair. Why does the U.N. continue to place the Muslims in high offices? Is it for political correctness? Obama does the same thing. I just read a report about the seriousness of many of his appointed high oval office personal belonging to the Muslim Brotherhood and of course, he is fully aware of it. This was no accident.
I hope you are correct about Libya. What I do believe is that although their well intentions may start off on the correct foot, it will not be long before Egypt/Iran/Iraq and others will condemn them to such a degree with financial and political coercions that they will no longer be able to fulfill their own self destiny; and it won’t take long. Especially if they continue the path of befriending and co-existing with Israel.
But that just my thoughts and reading into it….I hope I’m wrong.
LikeLike
One more thing,
I also believe that Israel waited too long to strike Iran, most likely in the Hopes the U.S. and U.N. would counter many of the dangerous situations arising, to no avail.
Israel will instead be on an all out defensive war in the future, and that never bodes well in war. It is now to the point of being nearly irreversible by any future government policies.
LikeLike
William, I fear greatly for Israel especially in light of the upcoming meeting at the UN which will vote on whether to grant a Palestinian state carved out of Israeli land, including 50% of Jerusalem. It is not certain that the U.S. will veto such a vote favoring the PLO, because Obama supports strongly the formation of a separate state. This can only result in war of some sort at some time. After all, Obama has already publicly declared that he wants Israel to return to the borders that existed pre – 1967. And Israel’s enemies want to drive her into the sea. We know that because of the public statements they have made time and time again.
IMO, September is going to be jam-packed with treachery. We are facing the “day of rage” in September where the union thugs and others of like mind plan to take over the Wall St. area with a tent city, etc. in protest of the “dirty, filthy capitalists.” It is hard telling how far that will go. The protesters would like to carry it nationwide. Woe is us!
LikeLike
I should like to point out that the rebels have now had to formally face the issue of the Lockerbie Bomber and HAVE FAILED the test. sigh.
LikeLike
Here is the Israeli/Palestinian issue and solution in a nutshell. Read and memorize in case you find yourself in an unavoidable debate with a moron.
Couldn’t say it better myself, so I will just provide this quote:
Further, consider the attached picture. The top part represents an international agreement (i.e. International Law) determined by the League of Nations. The blue part and the orange part are all one region, under British authority, called Palestine. That is the first and only time a geopolitical entity named “Palestine” ever existed. There are not now and never were any “palestinians” – just Arabs and Jews.
In short order, by 1920, the League of Nations had formally recognized the blue part as belonging to Jews as an Israeli homeland, and the orange part assigned as Arab. Over time, including the pushing and shoving of WWII, the blue region emerged, dis-engaged from British control, and became the independent State of Israel. Similarly the orange area largely became Jordan. Thus on the international stage and fully out in the open and under righteous agreements, the British Mandate of Palestine has ALREADY been divided into two countries – a Jewish state and an Arab state.
Subsequent instability has been AGAINST Israel – there is NO “occupation of Arab lands by Jews”. In the interest of “land for peace” the Israelis already gave the Gaza Strip to the Arabs. The Arabs have spilled over and encroached into the west bank area. See second picture. The Israelis have bent over backward to let Arabs live there unmolested – i.e. they have not kicked them out. (consider the reverse – what would happen if any Jews spilled over into Arab space?)
The ONLY RIGHT ANSWER at this point is to leave Gaza as it is – unfortunately the Israelis gave that away and they are not getting it back. But they have every right to wall things off and totally isolate Gaza to protect themselves. Then it must be made clear in the strongest International Law terms that EVERYTHING ELSE west of Jordan River, north of Egypt, and South of Syria is ISRAEL. Whether or not Israel allows “foreigners” to live in Israel, and under what conditions, is like with any other sovereign state, totally up to them.
That leaves the contested area of the Golan Heights. Consider the third picture. You can see that the Golan Heights is a bit north and west of the Sea of Galilee – this map demarks the region as “Under Israeli Occupation”. This is a tougher nut to crack. Clearly it is on the “wrong side of the river” for Israel to claim unambiguous title. However a great war was launched from there against Israel and Israel defended themselves and further captured this area as the spoils of war. Israel now claims that this area is essential to it’s own self-defense.
I will concede that some further international effort is needed to sort this piece out. But the rest of the issue is simple. Yes, it is really that simple.
Finally, I must mention Jerusalem. Arab claims upon Jerusalem are laughably ridiculous. There is no ancient Arab history nor antics of Mohamed related to Jerusalem. Arab intentions against Jerusalem are from the time of the Crusades, or slightly before. It is abundantly clear that the Arabs encroached into that region (which they formerly had no interest in – their interests lying in Arabia and Syria) simply and expressly to annoy the Jews. They knew the Jews considered the region the holiest of holies, so the Arabs in their essential, Mohamed-directed, hatred of Jews just literally squatted there and shat all over everything. Various mosques and “holy sites” were purely fabricated. They had no tradition in Islam teachings or history.
That is the TRUTH IS TRUTH and FACTS ARE FACTS overview of the mess. We badly need another Crusade.
Here is the first referenced map:
LikeLike
Here is the second referenced map:
LikeLike
Here is the third referenced map:
LikeLike
Carlyle,
I agree with your aspired insight that Arab claims upon Jerusalem are laughably ridiculous. This should be on every public history channel with archeological facts, history parchments from Rome, and every factual conquest known well prior to anyone known as “Mohammad” and “Islam” ever came into the picture centuries before. Its a no brainier…
I am however not following you on the Lockerbie Bomber release situation. Please explain so that I am not confused and better understand your position on this “test” of the Lockerbie bomber.
Thanks, as always,
Me
LikeLike
I thought I described it above. The new government has/had the chance to send that SOB back to Western custody where he belongs. To serve life in prison or be executed for his heinous crime. They could have and should have done that. Both to show the righteousness of their new regime (and contrast themselves with the previous evil regime), and to show respect and gratitude to the Western powers that assisted them and enabled their progress. On both counts: FAIL and FAIL.
LikeLike
Oh,
Well in all honesty, that is what I initially thought you conveyed – but that didn’t make any sense to me. I would agree without a N.Y. second escaping the time clock that the Lockerbie Bomber needs to be handed over and placed back in prison. However, I do not agree that this is possible at this time. I will explain my opinion.
First, there is no “new government”, there is no government at all. No one is in charge, no leadership, nothing. It is a complete dismal dire straights.
Secondly, even if Libya decides to install a correct government similar to what Aussie is describing, that will certainly take time. Assuming that even happens.
Lastly, if and when an ideal government is installed, then certainly a faith of “goodwill” of new leadership would be to turn over the Lockerbie bomber. But now is not that time for obvious reasons.
Just my opinion though,
LikeLike
William and Carlyle, I see both points of view but do believe that it is too much to expect of the rebels at this time. There are too many sympathies for their countryman, especially if he is as near death as they claim and the pics indicate. Not that their decision is purely right, but if he is in a coma, as they say, would our judicial system even accept him because of humanitarian reasons? We know that he has the blood of over two hundred victims on his hands and should never have been released from prison in the first place. “Wrong judgment goeth forth.”
LikeLike
This is way OT, but my sub-conscious and also conscious thoughts are whirling around in the gray matter. Let me share and then, please, straighten me out or tell me to “bug off.” 🙂
It concerns Gov. Perry and his bid for the W.H. Probably much of my thinking has been unduly stirred because of the overbearing and repetitious rants of the star poster from over yonder. Granted we all are, or should be, pondering and sorting through information as we hear about it, regardless of our persuasions at any given time. Nearly all of what we are hearing over yonder consists of Perry’s accolades and how rapidly he is advancing in the polls. It goes on ad infinitum over there.
Now, I am still listening and learning about Perry, the relative newcomer, but have some serious misgivings that persist regardless of the good things we are hearing. Truly, it is too soon for me to be making any firm decisions one way or another. So, the point is not whether I would consider voting for him in the primaries, but rather what is the “game plan” of the progressives, or is there even one? I believe there is, however.
I think most can agree that Perry does have some baggage. The most nagging thing to me is – not what he is saying, but what he has been doing in TX. The latter seems to be a mixed bag. He definitely can talk the talk, but does he walk the talk? There is some evidence to me that he is weak in that area. I won’t get into the negatives or positives here now.
The question that many are asking is this: What is the game plan? I have heard that it is possible that the opposition (Dems, MSM, etc.) want the Repubs and conservatives (including Tea Partyers) to quickly embrace Perry so that he will win the nomination. (I have just recently heard that there is a push to accelerate the primary elections by some states.)
Then AFTER he wins, the opposition (star role for the MSM) will attack him mercilessly for personal indiscretions, crony-capitalism, and a host of other faults, including resembling GWB too much, with the intention of swaying the voters against him, thereby allowing Obama to win once again. At this point in time now the MSM and Dems are attempting attacks, of sorts, but not enough to turn “us” against him. In fact, their present attacks could make him even more appealing to “us.”
To put it plainly, “Are we being set up?”
Perry says some good things, but he is definitely the consummate politician. I think most are agreed on the latter – his friends and enemies. My problem is this: Politicians most often say whatever is necessary to get elected. Then their subsequent actions prove that words don’t mean much.
Does anyone feel like weighing in? Please do so and redirect my thoughts, or whatever.
LikeLike
Another thing, if I may. For several months the star performer over yonder was missing in action – completely, except for a very occasional posted link. Now all of a sudden, there is a pet issue – Perry. As some of us who know a little of the inside scoop can appreciate, it is obvious that this one has been and is still believed to be a dem – operative. Is it strictly coincidental that there would be a re-emergence at this time, or has it been planned to once again serve the opposition? Where was the one during the period of respite? Lacked an “assignment”? Just askin’.
LikeLike
Cabby Dear! You should know better than hanging out “over there”. Furthermore you should double know better than letting your brains get scrambled by “star performer”.
But to specifically address your concerns:
1. My MAJOR concern about Perry (before I get into your specific theories) is that he is FAR too pro-Muslim. This concerns me a GREAT deal. In fact, it concerns me even more than similar observations against Gov Christie.
2. I am afraid I can provide you little comfort. You are at least 90% probably right about him being an enemy operative, so yes that is a deep concern.
Further to your theory, it does seem like the MSM and others who might normally be more aggressive in attacking Perry now are quieter than expected. Not that I know of any specific skeletons or smoking guns, but there is certainly less yapping than typical.
Another related question is if, as it is beginning to seem, it boils down to a battle between just Perry and Romney: Who is better? Who is worse? and really importantly: Who would the enemy rather face?
The one bit of solace I can muster is that Perry has won elections before – how hotly contested I do not know – but at least against people who wanted to beat him pretty bad. If nothing surfaced then, perhaps we can be somewhat comforted that perhaps there is nothing there.
On the other hand, perhaps you are not alarmed about actual skeletons? Is your concern more about, given his history and ideology, that his enemies will be exceptionally proactive and successful in making up credible-sounding lies?
I did not use to worry that political parties were as evil as you are now suggesting. But with the Muslim Usurper Tyrant having been put forward and actually elected – it kinda forces one to ask these quasi-paranoid questions – doesn’t it!?
LikeLike
Cabby, nothing is off-topic. You are raising some interesting questions. The primaries are still months away and there is time to evaluate the candidates.
There is one thing and I feel certain that Michele Bachmann is the wrong person to become the candidate. She has no executive experience and quite frankly she is naive in a number of subjects. This makes Perry more appealing.
The DNC had been pushing Romney and Huntsman and Huntsman is such a joke that it is not funny. The man is a watermelon, and on top of that Romney has watermelon tendencies.
The candidate needs to be someone who lacks the Watermelon (Green) credentials, yet is someone who believes in conservation. That person could be Sarah Palin. She has yet to announce her candidacy.
LikeLike
Thanks so much for the good feedback, Carlyle and Aussie! I would never dare make a peep along these lines over “there”.
First of all, Carlyle, I hear you about the other place, but somehow it is hard to divorce it completely, probably because for months that was the first and only place I embraced after learning to use the computer in 2009. It is hard to break old habits, and, besides I still resent one or two posters being able to take over. Also, someone has to snoop around at times.
🙂
Now to more substantive issues. I have heard something about Perry’s pro-Muslim tendencies but need to check that out further. Also, Carlyle, you make a very good point about Perry’s having won hotly contested elections before. Query: Is it because there was not that much for the opponents to hit him with, or because he had good financial backing and used his spectacular (what I’ve heard) political skills to win? On the positive side I’ve heard that the conservative Senator, James Inhofe, has come out in support of Perry.
Carlyle, you say, On the other hand, perhaps you are not alarmed about actual skeletons? Is your concern more about, given his history and ideology, that his enemies will be exceptionally proactive and successful in making up credible-sounding lies?
I’ve heard rumors of several events in Perry’s life that sound unsavory. Those things have been mostly alleged by Repubs living in Texas. Those could be “actual skeletons”, and if those are really true, or even any semblance of being so, the MSM may lie in wait and really bombard him after the primaries should he get the nomination. And, yes, as the media is prone to do nowadays, they could be successful in making up lies to try to smash any hopes of winning over Obama. We will just have to wait and see how this all plays out. It is too early to really predict the outcome, I’m sure.
LikeLike
Aussie, thanks for your assurance that I was not out of line in introducing this Perry subject.
I agree with you about Bachmann. She has been very much a Tea Party favorite and is truly conservative. There is absolutely no problem with her views of limited government and a restoration to constitutional principles, but I don’t think she can effectively carry forward her message for the many months ahead. She seems to have reached her peak with not much momentum to last the duration. As you say, she has no executive experience and not well informed on a broad range of subjects. Her mantra seems to be that she has been a “fighter.” If you listen to her in the debates, that is one of her main thrusts. We need someone more than a fighter. Pawlenty pointed out her failure to “do” during her tenure as a member of Congress. The “fighter” description is wearing out, imo.
I agree with you about Huntsman and Romney. Huntsman’s campaign is a joke, and Romney is too wishy-washy in too many areas to be really attractive.
Yes, you are right about Sarah Palin. She is suppose to announce around Sept.3rd, I believe. If she chooses to run, it will be interesting to see what happens between Perry and Romney. The one big problem with Palin is that, although many Repubs love her, they do not feel that she can win against Obama in a general election. In other words, any of us who like her are not assured that the general electorate will like her.
Frankly, when I hear that more than 30% like Obama and that it could be a close race between him and any of the top leading contenders, I have a terrible, sinking feeling. If those are truly the conditions that exist in our country, then the electorate will deserve it if they get him for another four years.
LikeLike
Re: the Lockerbie bomber – the man has been in and out of a coma. He is dying. In this case I support the NTC.
I am more interested in how they respond to finding those responsible for the death of Yvonne Fletcher outside of their Libyan embassy in 1984. One of the people named is dead, but there are at least 2 others involved, including the man who pulled the trigger.
Also, if the NTC are really wanting a return to pre-Gadhafi era under king Idris (who is dead btw) then like him they will be either neutral or pro-Israel. Idris was pro-Israel.
The NTC has not given any indication of their views on the subject and most of what I am hearing from you is conjecture.
Iran was providing Gadhafi with weapons. They have provided humanitarian aid to the NTC. I think the provision of food and medicine is fair enough, and it is a long way from establishing normal relations.
Iran is Shia. The majority of Libya is Sunni or Sufi, and they are more in line with Saudi Arabia than with Iran. It is Qatar and probably through Qatar, Saudi Arabia who supported the NTC, not Iran. China is already on the out and regretting their attitude which could see long term changes in economic matters since the NTC has promised to satisfy all contracts pre the revolution.
LikeLike