Category Archives: Gaddhafi

Which scandal will bring about impeachment?


The reality is that Barry Soetoro is embroiled in a series of scandals, not just one, that have the potential to bring about impeachment proceedings. In each case it is the lies and the cover-up that is important. The Republican Congressman Chaffetz is probably the most keen to consider impeachment over the stonewalling regarding the Al Qaeda attack at Benghazi. I do think that by the end of his investigations he will be even more keen to see the impeachment process put in place. Yet there are other scandals, each with their own importance and each of them attacks the very freedoms that are gained from the U.S. Constitution.

1. The attack on the First Amendment. The reality of the scandals that indicate attacks on the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution is only just beginning to hit. There are at least three scandals involved:

– IRS harassment of conservative groups

– the collection of AP records via DoJ

– the attack on Fox News and in particular James Rosen also via DoJ.

I have no doubt that this list will increase in the coming days as more and more things come to light. It is early days where each scandal is concerned.  The IRS one has some legs with so many lies being told that it seems obvious that the instigator of the harassment was in fact POTUS. The smoking gun has to be in the White House logs… and no I do not believe the story about the forum being the reason that the head of the union was at the White House. The log actually indicates that she was there for a meeting with POTUS. (developing)

2. The attack on the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution

– Fast and Furious which is still being investigated and there continues to be a situatin where Eric Holder is in contempt of Congress and the White House refuses to hand over documents relating to that matter claiming executive privilege. At this stage I am willing to state that Barry Soetoro was aware of Fast and Furious and that he was the instigator because he wants to be able to ban guns.  I have no doubt that Eric Holder is in collusion with Barry on this subject.

3. Benghazi. I cannot properly classify this one, but I see it as tied up with the attack upon the First Amendment. My reasoning is based upon the attitude of Muslims with regard to the Freedom of Speech…. but that is only one very small portion of this particular subject. Benghazi is a multi-part scandal because there are many issues to take into account including talk of gun running (this is not proved). The real scandal is of course the cover-up and there is where the free speech component surfaces, because of the false claims that a third rate short documentary was somehow to blame for what took place. The person who was responsible for the documentary is in jail, allegedly because of parole violations. Yet, it goes deeper because this is also an attempt to stop anyone criticizing Islam. The speeches of Barry Soetoro to the UN on the subject is ample evidence that this story is about anti-free speech motives.

Now I am one who supported the people of Libya as they fought to free themselves from the yoke of Gadhafi. It did not bother me that some of those fighting were Islamists. What Gadhafi had done through the years was sufficient reason to not support him in any way. I will continue to point out that the Libyan government is elected and it is not run by Islamists (even though Islamists are trying to get control). There are lots of issues remaining in Libya and the situation remains fluid. What I want to point out is that those governing Libya were not responsible for the Al Qaeda attack upon the US consulate. I will also point out that the Libyans would have been more cooperative if it had not been for the amateurish stuff ups that followed the attack including Susan Rice going on TV and contradicting President Mogharief of Libya. She caused him to lose face in Libya and abroad because of the contradiction.  I do not support the Islamists in Libya and I believe that those responsible for the continuing violence in that country, especially in Benghazi need to feel the full force of the Libyan law. However, that is a Libyan internal matter and is not necessarily related to the AQ attack.

The real issue is the cover-up and the refusal to acknowledge that Al Qaeda is not in demise as proclaimed. There has been a refusal to acknowledge terrorism in the USA and that has led to the harming of the survivors of the Ft Hood jihadi attack by Hussein Nidal. It also led to the refusal of the FBI to take warnings about the Tsarnaev brothers seriously, even though it did not stop the FBI doing surveillance on a journalist by the name of James Rosen who was just doing his job.

4. This leads me to the AP scandal again because it is one that is developing legs since it was first revealed. Once again I see this in terms of an attack upon free speech.

At least 3 of these scandals are tied to the Supreme Court decision in the Citizens United case. From that point of view, I can see that there is an overkill, an overreaction in regard to that decision. In that decision, certain things were struck down that affected to a very small extent campaign donations.  What it did not do was to make it easier for corporations to donate to political parties or individuals. Neither did that case make it easy for overseas individuals to donate to political figures. In fact Barry Soetoro has been guilty of accepting those oversease donations (yet another scandal) and hiding the information via bundling. The parts of McCain-Feingold that specifically stayed in place were those parts that forbid foreign donations. The case itself dealt with the chilling of free speech, and this was something brought out in the opinion of Clarence Thomas. It was an issue that 5 of the justices took seriously. For this they were attacked by Barry Soetoro.

Each and every one of these particular scandals could lead to impeachment. We just have to see what develops because in each instance there has been intimidation of individuals that has been in place to stop them talking. It is not just Gregory Hicks who has complained about such intimidation.

A few names keep springing up in regard to these matters. One of them is Lois Lerner, another is Cheryl Mills who is a close associate of Hillary Clinton.  The name of Cheryl Mills keeps cropping up as underlings in the State Department have been “punished” and without just cause.

Advertisements

Syria vs. Turkey. The Syrian situation hots up


The conflict in Syria is nothing like either Libya or that of Egypt and Tunisia. This is because it is more of a tribal conflict than any of these other situations. It is also because there are other big players behind the scenes. Tunisia was the springboard, and the people wanted to get rid of a President who had been there for a very long time, to the point that he was involved in big time corruption. The same is true for both Egypt and Libya, yet the Libyan situation bore little resemblance to either of those two nations for other reasons. In Syria, it is the Alawite tribe, which is a minority Shiite tribe that has had power for close to 40 years. On the opposite side there appears to be Sunni  (the Al Qaeda connection?) but in reality it is a tribe vs. tribe conflict.  Yes, there are Christians in Syria, but these Christians have been backing Assad for their own personal reasons.

In working through the actual history of the conflict (which I have not completed at this point in time), one has to be careful about not being blind-sided bigger Sunni vs Shiite type conflict. It is important to go back and look at how the protests began, who was behind the protestors and what they expected to gain by ousting Assad. At the moment, even that is moot because Assad has been able to hang onto power. This is because of his connections to Iran.

The Syrian conflict is a battle by proxy and Assad has powerful allies behind the scenes. In fact Assad brought in the Iranian guards in an effort to clean out the protesters. It is important to look at these allies and see what influence they have been exerting – it is an influence that has prevented the UN from taking much stronger action. Those other allies include both Russia and China.

Once again we have what I call the sphere of influence. Russia, Iran and China are all seeking influence in Syria. When Gadhafi was defeated the Russians and the Chinese lost an important ally and sphere of influence in North Africa and the Middle East. They were not likely to allow any further deterioration of their influence in that region. It is for this reason that both Russia and China have vetoed any positive UN action in Syria. They have too much to loose if Assad is defeated. The other player is Iran and again Syria has a pivotal role because Syria has been like a go-between with regard to Lebanon. Iran has been sponsoring the Hezbollah via the Syrian regime. Hezbollah is allied to the Palestinians in the West Bank and the Gaza strip. Everything fits together when we look at the sphere of influence.

When the conflict broke out in Libya, Gadhafi’s biggest mistake was the decision to use his own forces against the people of Benghazi and other towns. He actually used his air force to bomb those towns. It is for this reason that other countries via the UN and NATO were prepared to help the people who were in danger because of Gadhafi’s intention to punish them in such a fashion. Gadhafi also made the mistake of claiming that those protesting were Al Qaeda. A very small portion had some links to Al Qaeda, but the way in which the conflict snowballed, those people remained a minority. The Berbers from the mountains who were the first to penetrate Tripoli were not members of Al Qaeda. They were in fact a minority people who had been squashed over the years by Gadhafi, and they, like the people from Benghazi and elsewhere wanted their freedoms above anything else. It seems to me that Assad did not learn from Gadhafi’s fatal mistakes.

During the early part of the conflict in Syria there were army defections, and on top of that there were thousands of people who crossed the border into Turkey. For a very long time the Turks have been keeping an eye on the situation. They have provided refugee camps for the people who fled the Syrian border region. It should be pointed out that those army deserters did so because they were being ordered to fire upon unarmed civilians (a lot like what happened in Libya). Assad kept on claiming that the soldiers who were killed were killed by Al Qaeda but that is not the truth. Many of them were shot in the back because they refused to fire upon their own people…. and then Assad blamed an imaginary opposition. It must be pointed out, however, that there continues to be the danger and potential that Al Qaeda will get involved in Syria.

The latest news from the region is not so good, and it is another step which could lead to a war in the region. Today, the Syrians shot down a Turkish fighter aircraft. This incident has the potential of seeing an escalation that goes beyond the borders of Syria. Since Turkey is a NATO country, there is the potential that Turkey will call upon NATO to come to their aid.

It really is the wrong time to have someone who is really stupid in the White House.

Algeria: Beware that this could become another hot spot


I am not going to add much to this topic at this point in time. I will write up any information on my alternative blog but will mention anything here that might be of interest. 

In recent weeks Algeria was subjected to an attack by terrorists who are associated with Al Qaeda. My personal opinion here is that the attacks have nothing to do with Libya, but we shall see. The reason that I think this way is due to the fact that the attacks themselves are not new, but that they have been stepped up.

Algeria has been a supporter of Daffy Duck, and in fact I have been suspicious of some “news” items that were released that had been accusatory towards the Libyan Gadhafi opposition, which seemed to be propaganda of the Gadhafi regime. Early this week news came that members of the Gadhafi family had crossed the border and were in Algeria. Aisha Gadhafi has since that crossing given birth to a girl that she has named Safiyah. The members of the Gadhafi family who crossed into Algeria included: Safiyah, Aisha, Mohammed and Hannibal. If anything Hannibal and his wife need to be extradited to face charges of cruelty towards the nanny of their children (that is quite an horrific story), however, Mohammed was not directly involved in what has taken place. Algeria has since stated that the family are being placed under house arrest. We shall see whether it is true.

The reason I am highlighting Algeria is that already there are claims that Al Qaeda are stepping up activity in Algeria because that government has supported Gadhafi. Personally, I see this as an excuse to put down any revolt in Algeria, and to repeat what had taken place in Libya (that is the government repression of the population) and in Syria. Algeria has until now not had much in the way of problems from opponents, but that could be about to change. I am not saying that this is a possibility that is not true, but I am treating the allegation with caution.  Up until now the news sources that I have used have made no real mention of Al Qaeda showing any real support for the NTC and those who were fighting to get rid of Gadhafi. This is probably why the news item that is making this particular claim stands out like a sore thumb.  

From the beginning the NTC spokespeople have been keen to keep out foreigners that might raise the hackles of Al Qaeda, which is an organization that is not strictly present in Libya, but there are sympathises or at least those with similar views who are Libyans. If this element is to remain placated and kept in their place then a fine line needs to be walked. The NTC has been keen not to repeat the mistakes made in Iraq, which in translation means that they do not want to do anything that would encourage an Al Qaeda presence.  This is what makes the claims coming out of Algeria very jarring.

It should also be pointed out that Robert Mugabe has expelled the Libyan ambassador to that country because he expressed allegiance to he NTC. This should be seen in the light of Mugabe being an ally of Gadhafi, and one who has just had his funding (balls) cut off so that he has less funds available to conduct terror campaigns against his own people.

Also, some are voicing concern because Iran sent “aid” to Benghazi. I agree that there is cause to be concerned. It should be pointed out that Iran had been illegally sending weapons to Gadhafi, but they sent discreet humanitarian aid to Benghazi. In other words according to the NTC what they received was medicine and food for the people of Libya. I see this as a diplomatic move that is meant to put Iran in the good books with the NTC once they realized that Iran’s real ally was being deposed. It reminds me a bit of the attitude of China and Russia who had caused a fuss in the early part of this whole saga only to find themselves on the outer with the NTC. This is why I suspect the motivations of Iran is based soley upon ensuring some form of relationship with the NTC. Since most Libyans are either Sunni (explains why they tend towards Al Qaeda) or Sufi, I do not see that there will be a strong relationship with Iran in the near future, but one never knows how things will turn out.

The civil war is not quite over in Libya, and the propaganda war is still being waged on the international scene. This is why I offer a note of caution when it comes to Algerian propaganda with regard to the motivations of the Al Qaeda group that have recently attacked the military barracks. Look first to nationalist reasons for the attacks before applying motivations associated with giving refuge to members of the Gadhafi family, or giving support to Gadhafi. I am sure that eventually we will know the truth.

 

Victory: Tripoli – at least I hope so!!


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.

and the winner is…. envelope please….. al-Zawahri – watch out for those drones


AQ have announced that they have picked a new leader. I guess with the recent thinning of the ranks a number of possible candidates were eliminated from the race :). As expected the Egyptian, a man who is under suspicion for the assassination of Anwar Sadat, and is wanted for other crimes, al-Zawahri has been nominated for the post of leader.

Der Spiegel actually has quite an interesting analysis regarding al-Zawahri taking the reins. Despite the fact that Der Speigel is a left-wing paper, I actually find a lot of their articles and analysis to be quite informative, which is why I tend to not discount their point of view too quickly. Therefore, I think that the article is well worth a read to get some idea of their point of view.

Of interest is the possibility that the various AQ groups could split. This might be very much the case for AQ in Yemen.

The question now will be how al-Qaida’s members and supporters will accept the new “amir.” No one will dispute his leadership, but it is conceivable that the offshoot al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) will maintain a more distant relationship with him than they did with bin Laden. There is a long-standing animosity between al-Qaida’s Egyptian contingent and its members from Saudi Arabia and Yemen. There will not be a mutiny, but perhaps the implementation of directives from headquarters will be less forthcoming than before.

The second question concerns what Zawahiri’s directives will look like. Will he try to reorganize al-Qaida?

In general, Zawahiri follows the same ideology and strategy as Osama bin Laden. But there are some admittedly vague indications that the terrorist network might try out a new strategy. These indications coincide with Zawahiri’s takeover, but they would not likely be based solely on his decision.

It is striking that in both the al-Qaida statement from the general command and in a high-quality propaganda video released some weeks ago, there are calls to non-members to become active participants in the jihadist movement.

In the two-hour video, for example, viewers are presented with dozens of examples of such sole offenders, including from the 19th century. One man, one attack: Up till now, this has not been al-Qaida’s official line. The terror network, whilst welcoming cooperation with volunteers of all kinds, has nevertheless insisted on a kind of terrorist purity: Only where al-Qaida itself was involved, should al-Qaida be mentioned.

The new message, however, could be understood as al-Qaida giving its blessing to individual attackers to carry out terror acts in the network’s name. In general, it is better to make contact with al-Qaida first, the group’s chief ideologist Abu Yahya al-Libi says in the propaganda video — but if that is not possible, would-be terrorists should act on their own initiative. Sole attackers rather than cells: The thinking behind this idea could be that groups are easier to detect.

In the document released on Thursday there is a passage that seems to echo this approach: Al-Qaida extended its hands against all those who are also “working for the victory of Islam” — in al-Qaida speech that means those planning terror attacks. It does not matter whether this is within or outside existing organizations, it adds.

Al-Qaida has also slightly shifted its position in another way: In the beginning, the terror network did not have a coherent message on the popular revolts in Arab countries. It lagged behind, the messages were out of date and sounded desperate, given the absence of any Islamist agitation in key places like Cairo, Tunis and Damascus.

But in the past week, Zawahiri — even before he gained the role of “amir” — released his own video in which he revealed the first attempt at a strategy in the face of the uprisings: Al-Qaida supports the rebellions against the “godless” regimes, but these movements must subsequently be transformed into a holy polity.

There is also an echo of this position in Thursday’s statement: The revolutions are incomplete until Sharia, the Islamic legal system, is introduced.

Some of these comments actually suggest that AQ under al-Zawahri is searching for relevance in the face of the “Arab spring”. Since we do not know much about the make of the protest groups in Egypt, Tunisia, Syria and Yemen in particular, one could argue that AQ is seeking to muscle in on what has begun by the demand for “muslim purity” and of course their usual demand for the setting up of a caliphate. So far, only in Yemen has AQ had some form of success, by taking over a town in the south of Yemen. However, AQ is also making its presence felt in Tunisia. Some also claim that AQ is strongly present in Libya, but that is simply not true, despite the fact that there are elements amongst those doing the actual fighting. 

Also, I note that al-Libi, who is from Libya seems to have risen in the ranks of AQ. I do not know if there is any specific relevance with regard to how AQ views the situation in Libya. Note: the fact that there are no boots on the ground means that AQ is robbed of the opportunity for rhetoric and the stirring up of the ummah to go fight the “baddies”. Also, note that neither the Tripoli regime, nor the Benghazi NTC have received endorsement from AQ. The only countries supporting Tripoli are those that actually get funds from Tripoli to finance their own terrorism against their people (including Jacob Zuma in South Africa – exactly what did Daffy promise Zuma during that meeting?).

The aim needs to be to keep AQ out of the picture in Libya and this will only happen when there is a political settlement, coupled with the departure of Daffy Duck from Tripoli.

With regard to Egypt, the ideology of MB and AQ are not quite the same because their methods vary just a little bit. It seems that MB have from the beginning been intent upon gaining political control without the fighting and bloodshed. They are now in a position to realize their dream. This is thanks to a military junta that favours MB and is working towards MB gaining control. The end result will probably be an alignment with Iran.  (This is a very bad thing). Muslim Brotherhood is a fascist organization.

 

Daffy Duck the Gunna


I just found an article that gives quite a bit of insight into the antipathy between Benghazi and the Daffy Duck regime. From what I can gather there has never been any love lost between Daffy and the citizens of Benghazi. The BBC has an interesting article about “demolition” sites in Benghazi. This is not necessarily an article about the “war” but… you can read it for yourself….

It turns out that Gadhafi has a reputation as a “gunna” i.e. one who is “gunna do this” or “gunna do that”. In this article for example it highlights a variety of projects that never really got off the ground, including a railway project (VFT projects anyone?). There is about 875 metres of track that has been laid in this great railway network.

When it comes to crimes, though Daffy and his sons really take the cake. This article also explains about what happened at a football stadium at Benghazi and how Saadi Gadhafi had the stadium razed to the ground over an incident that is really worth a bit of a laugh. He also had several people arrested and 3 were killed as a result of the incident.

I find that as I read these things, I learn more about the real nature of the conflict, and I remain reassured that Al Qaeda and Islamists are not behind the rebellion in Benghazi. The gunna projects are an indication of what went wrong in the relationship between the two cities, yet they do not explain the who antipathy. Perhaps the fact that after the people sacked the fort in the middle of the town, and they started using the old national flag might be a clue about the people, and how they simply want freedom from a dictatorship that they never wanted in the first place.

what does the G8 know about Libya? Amazing turnaround by Russia over stance on Libya


I have just seen an amazing news report. As a result of the G8 conference Russia has changed its stance over Libya. Russia has joined with other European nations in demanding that Gadhafi goes from power.

Russia abstained from the UN vote that allowed NATO to start the no-fly zone action. Russia and China had been very vocal in their criticism of the NATO action claiming that NATO had gone beyond what was sanctioned by the UN resolution.

However, Russia has had a change of heart. This is the result of a discussion at the G8 conference… ah to be a fly on the wall.

UPDATE*******

The Guardian has some more detail on the G8 decision regarding Libya. Russia has decided that Gadhafi must go, which means there is a united front that did not exist before. It also means that Daffy Duck is being totally isolated.

However, this report goes a lot further and I think that it is quite interesting. Nations such as France have had continued contacts with unnamed individuals in Tripoli. They have had faxes and emails asking how they can “get out of this mess”. The answer remains the same: Gadhafi must go.

Sarkozy also highlighted the terms of the communique, saying: “There is unanimous support for this objective and the terms used against Gaddafi are particularly clear and hard and accepted by all the G8 countries including Russia.”

In unusually simple language for a G8 communique, the leaders of the industrialised west said: “Gaddafi and the Libyan government have failed to fulfil their responsibility to protect the Libyan population and have lost all legitimacy. He has no future in a free, democratic Libya. He must go.

“We welcome the work of the international criminal court in investigating crimes in Libya and note the chief prosecutor’s request on 16 May for three arrest warrants.” The Russians said they would send a delegation to Benghazi, but would not accept Gaddafi into exile.