Category Archives: Tunisia

Tunisians have a sense of humour

Australians are used to a certain form of political humour known as ridicule that is done in 5 minute skits on the radio. An all-time favourite with Aussies is a skit known as “Cactus Island”. Although I have not listened for several years, I can still chortle over some of the characterisations of political figures. This is especially true of the manner in which they portrayed both Gough Whitlam and Paul Keating. This kind of political humour helps to relieve a lot of tensions within the population.

It seems that regular, ordinary, every day Tunisians are now able to enjoy some of the same kind of humour, without landing in prison. This story comes via Reuters, explaining that if you watch the truck drivers at a certain time each morning you can see them chortling as they listen to the radio, and that the reason for the chortling is political humour:

On Radio Mosaic, the North African country’s most popular radio station, it’s daily sketch time when comedian Migalo ribs not just ousted Tunisian leader Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali, but all of the Arab leaders fighting for survival in the ‘Arab Spring’.

This week, Ben Ali and Yemen’s beleaguered leader Ali Abdullah Saleh, both now in Saudi Arabia, are arguing about the housework.

“Hey, come on Saleh, I’ve had enough of this! Every day, I prepare the breakfast, I wash the dishes, and you’re lying there doing nothing,” Ben Ali complains.

“I’m ill! I’m ill!” remonstrates Saleh, who left Sanaa for Saudi Arabia last month after he was wounded in a bomb attack.

It descends into an argument. “You were ousted!,” says Saleh. “You came in an ambulance!” retorts Ben Ali — before Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, battling NATO forces and rebels, calls up to say he’s on his way over.

Interesting, whoever is behind this humour is of the opinion that Gadhafi is on the way out!! The whole idea of this Tunisian humour is freedom of expression. I am sure that you understand this as: Freedom of Speech, the first amendment. It is something that has been denied to Tunisians since Ben Ali became their President, and they want to preserve that right to free speech.

Political humor has taken off in Tunisia since Ben Ali’s police state collapsed in January, removing in one fell swoop a complex web of barriers, both mental and physical, to free expression.

Tunisians are proud that they set in motion a train of popular protest movements across the Arab world that have shaken entrenched political systems and international alliances. Now they see themselves at the second stage of the revolution: satire.

“Tunisia was a pioneer in revolution and now it’s at the forefront in comic expression,” says the voice behind a masked Zorro-like character called Captain Khubza, a name meaning ‘bread’, whose cartoon sketches are issued weekly on Facebook.

“We are complementing the revolution with this comedy because we don’t want there to be any retreat in any way on the issue of freedom of expression.”

Captain Khubza first appeared in February, brandishing a stick of French bread as his only weapon in the face of Ben Ali’s police in his first sketches featuring impressions of Ben Ali, a former interior minister whose extended family developed a mafia-like hold on all aspects of life in Tunisia.

The whole article is worth a read, because it gives a little bit of insight into why Tunisia became the leaders of a people revolt. What is extremely telling in this article is the statement that it is probable that “the people” who participated in the downfall of Ben Ali have no real idea about democracy. They have not experienced democracy.  There is some further information, that the little show with all of its skits (sounds a lot like Cactus Island) irritates some politicians who are waiting in the wings to gain power:

Even now, some Tunisian politicians have expressed irritation at the lampooning unleashed by the uprising.

On Radio Mosaic, Migalo also imitates Islamist Ennahda party leader Rached Ghannouchi, center-left leader Najib Chebbi, often accused of opportunism, and communist ideologue Hamma Hamami.

One sketch that centred around a major football match this week encapsulated popular views of them. Chebbi invites everyone to have a sandwich, Ghannouchi tells the players to cover up, and Hamami says he rejects everything, including football.

Captain Khubza said he received angry reactions from Ennahda supporters saying Ghannouchi should be left above the fray.

It is no surprise that the supporters of the Islamist Ennahda Party have no sense of humor and do not want to see those portrayals of Ghannouchi. However, it seems that the political humour is pinging the absurdity of the positions of the Islamists, and it is telling them that this is not what the people want. This has to be good in the long run, because this form of humour can help shape opinions, and if people can laugh at such things, then they are not necessarily going to vote for the Ennahda Party that would catapult the Islamists to power. Let’s just hope it is the case. Also, it seems that those behind the humour do not have much time for the Communist point of view.

Can it end well in Tunisia? I do not know. I have no way of knowing how the majority in Tunisia think. Just like in Libya there are many Tunisians who are very conservative when it comes to being Muslim. It does not mean that they are Islamists, but that they have a more conservative way of expressing themselves. Something else that I have learned about the Tunisians, and that is in the border region the people opened their hearts and their homes to the thousands of refugees that have crossed from Libya. They believe in the real meaning of hospitality.

Signs of the downfall of a regime

Whilst the situation in Yemen has not yet been resolved (and Al Qaeda has taken over one town in the south), and the situation in Syria has been escalating, all eyes have remained on Libya. The so called Arab spring seems more like a springboard for Islamists to gain control of the Middle East. Whilst I still believe the National Transitional Council with regard to their motivations, I have always remained sceptical about Egypt, Tunisia, Syria, Yemen and a number of other M.E. countries where there have been uprisings. One could say that most of these people have been useful idiots. Libya remains a standout because of the nationalism that is involved (however, should the Salafists raise their ugly heads, then we will know the actual direction that things will take).

The example of the end of the Pavli  (sp) regime in Iran remains an example of what is normally expected when a dictatorship style of regime is about to fall. The Shah of Iran will be remembered for his secret police and the murders, imprisonments etc that occurred at the end, rather than the blossoming of the people. The same is true of Saddam Hussein – if he did any good, then that is forgotten by the fact that he secretly killed thousands in his dungeons.  Therefore when applying those standards to the situation that we are witnessing this year we can indeed show that in order for the regime to fall the following needs to happen:

1. Mass defections of the leadership

2. Mass defections of the military

When Pavli was sent into exile, the final step had been the defection of the military and his personal guard.  We also saw this when Muburak was hounded from office – the military told him to go. In the coming weeks I think we will see it in Syria and Yemen. Right now we are witnessing the defections in Libya.

In the past few weeks there have been some more high level defections. One of them was the man in charge of the Libyan oil company. Today there is an announcement that more than 100 people have defected including some generals and other army officers. One of the generals in this last group estimates that the strength of the armed forces remaining is about 20%. These officers have denounced the violence against women and fellow citizens in the various cities within Libya. They have called upon the remaining officers and military to do the same and abandon Gadhafi.

This abandonment by top military personnel should be the writing on the wall, but Daffy Duck in his mental state is being extremely stubborn. The head of the African Union, Zuma from South Africa, was engaged in talks yesterday. Nothing has changed because the African Union roadmap to peace had already been rejected by both NATO and the rebels. Gadhafi has lost all legitimacy to remain as leader in Libya. His military and his ambassadors have abandoned him. He needs to exit whilst he has the opportunity.

Once Daffy Duck has gone, we will then know more about the Libyan direction. The people in Benghazi do seem to be more pro-western. I assume that is because many of them have been educated in the U.K. or the USA. However, there are pockets of people who are Islamists and have associations with Al Qaeda. Will they try to take over the government? They might be too weak to have much influence, and only time will tell whether or not the Islamists will gain a foothold.  If the National Transitional Council is true to its word, then Libya will set the future standard for a Middle East style democracy.

However, there should be warning bells in regard to Egypt. The Muslim Brotherhood have been very crafty in that they have pretended that they will not seek election, yet they have formed a political party. There is also evidence of a rise in the activity of the Salafists. Egypt is following very closely the path of Iran prior to the takeover by the Mullahs. Stupid people like the present WH regime cannot see that there is a very real danger and that should MB become successful that Egypt will align itself with Iran. This is very much on the cards.

Other very worrying signs come from Tunisia, where the revolution had come from the people, but the Islamists and Salafists have been gaining a foothold in the towns, imposing their will on the people, and seem determined to take power and then force women to wear the black sacks of nothingness.  They are doing this by forcing out those imams who are what I would call moderate, and replacing them with hardliners.

Whilst I have not been dealing all that much with Yemen and Syria, there are some developments, especially in Yemen. Saleh is also on the ropes, and he refuses to leave power in Yemen. Over the weekend Al Qaeda successfully took a town in the south of Yemen. However, there are some who believe that this happened with the consent of Saleh so that he could try to prove that without him in power Al Qaeda would take over the country (more Arab spring). I do not know if that is true. Yemen is another country where the military have been abandoning the regime and are sticking up for the people.

In 2009 when there was an uprising in Iran because the election was stolen by Ahmahnutjob, the world turned its back on the people. There were protests, which from the point of view of those involved were peaceful, until the basijj showed up and started up the violence. Hundreds of Iranians were killed, and thousands were injured. It was not until Neda was gunned down that there was any real world focus on the events. Even then Angela Merkel had to prompt Østupid to say something and to denounce the regime violence agaisnst the people, and then he went back to doing nothing, turning his back on the Iranian people because he wanted to be friends with the regime. The human rights abuses in Iran are shocking. People were dragged from their homes, many were beaten in the prisons, forced to sign false statements, and many young women and young men were raped (some never recovered from their injuries, with at least one being dumped in a ditch at the side of the road). Then the hangings behind closed doors began, and even now we do not know how many have been killed by the Iranian regime since 2009.  If the military had sided with the people perhaps we would have seen the end of the regime, but you have to keep in mind that the Grand Pooh-bah, expecting trouble, had imported members of Hezbollah to do his dirty work. Syria is using the same tactics, using the basijj to do the dirty work.

The Arab Spring – Tunisia – onwards Islamist soldiers

Just spotted this article, and I think that it is a good warning for anyone who thinks that the Arab spring will lead to real democracy. The article speaks about a Tunisian who is secular, a man who is a creative director and who has been honoured for his work. In April he was stabbed in the head – minor wounds. Just recently a very serious threat was made against his life.

As we expect, the Arab spring is something different from what has been inferred. This is the case in Egypt where we are witnessing the rise of Muslim Brotherhood, as well as the rise of the Salafists who are connected to Al Qaeda.  What we had not seen had been a similar activity in Tunisia. It is way too soon to know about Libya since they are still trying to get rid of a very evil man, but we do know that there are elements of Al Qaeda in Libya, and what we do not know is their strength in the total community. Hopefully, someone will report more accurately on this particular subject.

However, this is about Tunisia, and the group known as Ennhada, which is Tunisia’s largest Islamist party. Here are parts of that story that are of interest:

But just a week later, the source of some of the hostility to him became clearer.

At an April 17 rally organised by Ennahda, Tunisia’s largest Islamist party, a speaker called for Bouzid to be “shot with a Kalashnikov”.

The audience, which included a senior Ennahda leader, responded with cries of “Allahu Akbar”.

Distracted by the dramas of Libya, Syria and Yemen, the world appears to have forgotten the place where it all started. It was Tunisians, on January 14, who kicked out their dictator and began the Arab Spring. Now, though, there is growing concern here that the birthplace of the democratic revolt will also be the first country to see Islamists take significant political power.

With elections for a body to draw up the constitution due in just eight weeks’ time – though they may be postponed – Ennahda, according to opinion polls, will be the largest single party, with around 30 per cent of the vote, giving it a pivotal role in shaping the new Tunisia.

Mokhtar Trifi, head of the country’s human rights league, says that manifestations of Islamic radicalism – forced veiling, forced prayer, and condemnations for apostasy – are rising, too, all over the country.

But Ennahda draws support from the less prosperous interior.

And in a fractured political spectrum, with a dozen new parties since the revolution, it has the priceless advantage of a history. Formed, under a different name, in 1981, banned in 1990, Ennahda was the main opposition to the authoritarian rule of Zine el Abidin Ben Ali, with hundreds of its members tortured and jailed.

“We fought against the dictatorship. We have branches all over the country. We are not totally prepared for the elections, but perhaps we are better prepared than the others.”

That preparation manifests itself in many different ways. Earlier this month, in the poor Tunis suburb of Ettadhamen, Ennahda activists organised patrols to protect residents from rioting and looting (the local police, despised truncheon-arm of the regime, had their station torched after the revolution, and are still nowhere to be seen).

And in mosques across the country, Ennahda is moving to take control.

“After the revolution, seven local fundamentalists from Ennahda came,” says Aziz Khasseba, a teacher who is fighting to stop what he says is an Ennahda takeover of the Ahmadi mosque in Boumhal, just south of Tunis.

“They created a committee to control the wellbeing of the mosque. They meet every night, behind closed doors. They want to replace the imam and we’ve got up a petition to stop it. Even in front of the lycees [schools], they’re telling young people what to wear. They’re taking advantage of the revolution.”

In the town of Sfax, Habib Maaloul, the former imam at the el-Manar mosque, told The Sunday Telegraph that he and 15 other local imams had been forced from their posts by Ennahda activists.

“I was afraid,” he said. “I could complain, but the government is weak, it doesn’t want to get into a confrontation with Ennahda.”

Though these tactics are classic Islamism, Ennahda insists that their purposes are entirely moderate and benign. “We say that Islam and modernity can live together in complete tranquillity,” says Arbaoui, the spokesman. “Since 1981 we have respected pluralism, choice, and democracy.”

Ennahda does not want to impose the veil, Sharia law or an alcohol ban, though another spokesman, Abdullah Zouari, admits that a ban may be a long-term goal.

But many Tunisians simply do not trust the party. “Our problem is the gap between what they say and what they do,” said Jribi, the liberal leader.

There’s one message in the media and another in the mosques, where they are doing a big campaign. There they say that Islam is a package, you have to take the whole package. For politicians to say that, that’s very dangerous.”

Halima Jouini, of the Association of Democratic Women, says: “They never talk about human rights for women. They never talk about the rates of unemployment among women, only the numbers of women who are left unmarried.”

I have tried to highlight some of the more disturbing information.  Although Tunisia is not Iran, it seems that the Ennhada resembles Muslim Brotherhood. The methods and the taqiyya are the same. There is the claim that they are moderate, but then they are doing sneaky things that indicates that they have a different aim from most of the country.

Tunisia could be the first country to fall to the Muslim Brotherhood, and it looks like Egypt will fall as well. Anyone who believes the MB propaganda is being totally naive about what to expect. In Tunis there is an opposition to the Muslim Brotherhood but they are weak. This is probably the same for Egypt.

At the same time there is some really bad news coming from Yemen, as that country edges closer to civil war. Al Qaeda is on the rise in Yemen. It is a seriously bad situation.

the death of OBL does not change the F grade given to Østupid for his foreign policy failures

Yes, it is true, I am a very harsh critic of the Østupid regime.  There are few amongst them that deserve any accolades. However, I will give special mention to Hillary Clinton, Leon Panetta, David Petreus and John Brennan for their persistence in going after OBL. They deserve the accolades for the death of OBL, not Østupid.

In the week since it was announced that OBL was dead, there has been so much spin coming out of the White House that it has been enough to make a person go dizzy. The stories have been changing daily, and there has been a lack of consistency about those stories. Even that story about waiting 16 hours before giving the final go ahead sounds like cow dung. It is a story that does not show decisiveness, but instead shows virtual cowardice when it comes to facing the realities of a war situation. It sounds like the truth lies somewhere between the Ulsterman report on the matter, and the cow dung fodder that came out of the press. I have a hard time imagining that the fey pResident could hammer his fist on a table to give the go ahead on something this important, and then head off to parties and playing golf, whilst it is all going down.

The fallout from the action is still very nuclear at the present time. The relationship between the USA and Pakistan is deteriorating rapidly. What is worse, the Pakistanis have released the name of the top CIA agent in Pakistan, which has put his life in danger. This is partly caused by the spin that has come from the White House, as well as the refusal to release the pictures of the body of OBL or of the video that showed him being fed to the sharks.

There should have been a very real psychological advantage in showing those photographs, but the image-obsessed pResident has told the world that he is “afraid” of any ensuing outrage. Well, the fact is the outrage is going to happen anyway, and why should the USA be concerned about the sensibilities of a bunch of very brain deficient individuals who go crazy over the slightest thing?

However, it is not just the handling of finding OBL that keeps that grade as an F, but it is the way in which he has handled other Middle East issues.  For example, when the Iranian regime crushed the protests of the people with bloodshed, Østupid said nothing until prompted by Angela Merkel and Nicolas Sarkozy. If it had not been for those two, Østupid would have totally ignored the human rights abuses in Iran. It was the death of Neda that made a difference, but the difference was short lived. The notion of extending a hand has been proved to be fruitless, and on the other hand it has shown to the Iranians that the USA has been weakened by having this man as pResident.

Then there is the attitude over the uprising in Egypt. The strategic concerns for the region were overridden out of some other underlying beliefs that Muslim Brotherhood be allowed to control Egypt… oh what a web we weave!!! Now it seems that the Salafists are on the loose in Egypt and the uprisings that are about to take off again are going to get extremely bloody unless the army is willing to stop the slaughter of the Copts. Muburak at least kept these Salafists (allied to AQ) under control. The demands that the pResident made to Muburak to step down were totally ill-considered.  Tunisia is also troubled, but it is a far more settle nation for the time being.

Since there have been several uprisings, and with brutal crackdowns by the regime in question, this leaves open further accusations of inconsistency in policy. As an example here, look at both Libya and Syria. I do see the differences in that Syria was slower to crack down on the population, and in Syria the situation is becoming more and more bloody. It has been the slow build-up. On the other hand, in Libya, Gadhafi planned his reaction in advance of any protests. At first Østupid made some noises, but only after Sarkozy and Cameron were insisting that action had to be taken. The UN no-fly zone enforcement is justified in Libya because Daffy Duck was bombing his own people, pretending that he was combating AQ elements. I have discussed at length that much of the claims about the involvement of AQ in Libya has been exaggerated, and is mostly coming from regime propaganda. This does not mean that some AQ associated individuals are not present, it just means that the vast majority are not associated with AQ, and that they are fighting for their lives against a wounded bull. That being said, the issue here is the manner in which Østupid stepped back, leaving a gap that had not been filled in the mission to take out Daffy’s means of killing Libyans. The attack on Misrata is outrageous and it needs to be stopped.  It needs strong leadership from the US and instead, the leadership has been totally wimpy. I commend both Sarkozy and Cameron, and I give a special mention to the Turk Erdogan for their efforts in attempting to protect the citizens of Misrata and Zintan.

To these concerns about Libya, I add here that the pResident had plenty of time to go to the Congress before the UN resolution, and to put to Congress the possible actions that would be required. The fact that he was spending his time on vacation, playing golf and giving parties, indicates that he is not serious in being a leader of the world. The fact is that without Congressional approval, the participation of the US in the Libyan action is not illegal, but certainly illicit. 

For these reasons… and counting…. an F grade on foreign policy and international relations is still very appropriate.

Does AQ have a relevant role in the current ME uprisings

The BBC asks the question about the relevance of AQ in the Arab Spring. Actually, I am going to disagree in part with some of the conclusions of the writer of the piece because I think that he has not been able to spot the influence of AQ in a couple of countries, such as in Morocco.  On the other hand, I note that one of his sources is a Libyan who is an ex-AQ operative:

What we are witnessing now is completely against their methods or understanding of how to make change,” argues Noman Benotman, a former Libyan jihadist who knew Osama Bin Laden in Afghanistan but now works at the counter-extremist think tank, the Quilliam Foundation.

Although Nato’s military commander talked of “flickers” of al-Qaeda in Libya, European officials say they see no signs of a significant presence for the organisation.

And while some Islamists, often former members of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, are involved, they are seen as focused on confronting Colonel Muammar Gaddafi at home and not being subscribers to al-Qaeda’s wider ambitions.

Mr Benotman also says he has seen jihadists whom he knows in Libya change the way they behave and talk in the past two months.

“The way they start to make statements or to understand the conflicts is unbelievable, beyond my imagination. The only explanation I can offer is because they have been affected – whether they like it or not – by the wave of democracy.”

 These are the same points that I have raised about how these Libyans have been behaving. It would seem that they are only serious up to a point, at least for now, whilst they are fighting for their own country, and their own families.  (a bit different than fighting an alleged enemy in another country).

The author only identifies Yemen as having potential for AQ to exploit, but I disagree with him on that score. I would suggest that there is a possibility of AQ exploiting the situation in Syria as well as in Yemen. The reason is that the Salafists are tied to AQ. This is also true with regard to the control that Hamas wields over the Gaza strip, where they are being challenged by Salafists (which might explain the negotions between Hamas and Fatah – the Salafists being a common enemy to both). I think it is probable that the Salafists are behind the trouble in Syria – the Iranian Republican Guard has been in Syria and has been assisting with the bloody crackdown over more recent weeks that has led to a sharply increasing death toll in Syria.

Also, whilst AQ has been caught on the back foot, it would seem that the political aims of MB are coming to fruition in the region. I can see no real difference between the major aims of both groups, but I can see religious differences between them. This means that there is a double threat, from AQ as well as from MB, and perhaps the writer is blind to the influence of Muslim Brotherhood, as well as the inherent dangers of the rise of Iran that would be assisted if Muslim Brotherhood was to seize power in Egypt.

In Bahrain it would seem that the protests have been backed by Iran, and this explains the manner in which the crack down has taken place. Although the crackdown has been brutal it has not been as bad as in Syria or Libya were most of the deaths have occurred. It is hard to tell whether AQ has had a role in Bahrain, probably because those leading the protests have been Shia rather than Sunni. The Salafists and AQ tend to be Sunni.

The strongest evidence of AQ is in Morocco, and also in Germany, where there are sleeper cells.  A few months ago the Germans were on alert for a terrorist attack. Now comes the news that one cell has been busted in relation to that terror alert. There are sleeper cells in various countries, but this does not solve whether or not AQ is behind the Arab spring uprisings, or whether there are other agents of trouble, such as Iran, at work. I think it is a mixture, Iran, Communists, Salafists (AQ), Muslim Brotherhood, and other provocateurs. It is also probable that Russia has had a hand in the uprisings as well.

Daffy’s desperate propaganda

When a small group of people decided to protest the Gadhaffi regime in Benghazi during February 2011, having been inspired by protests in Egypt and Tunisia, they did not expect that Daffy goon snipers would fire upon them.  After the first were killed, more people joined the protests, until eventually thousands joined in… and then they managed to storm the Benghazi fort.  At this juncture they were joined by an army unit plus the interior minister who had defected to their side. It was the beginning.

The response to those initial protests in Benghazi was a springing up of protests in Zintan, Zawiyah, Tripoli, Misrata, Brega etc. etc. The protest movement was widespread. The response from the Daffy goons was deadly.  The uprisings in Tripoli were put down by the posting of foreign mercenary soldiers who were used as snipers – move outside the door, and get killed!!  The Daffy goons moved in on Zawiyah and the people held them off as long as possible. The situation was extremely deadly. This is the scene that was repeated in several regions in Libya. The protests were met with deadly force.

The UN became involved at the point where Daffy Duck had stated that he would show no mercy to the people of Benghazi, and he meant what he was saying. Just in the nick of time resolution 1973 was passed and the French  began the action against the Daffy goons, saving the people of Benghazi from further violence to their human rights. The UN has teams investigating the human rights violations in Libya and by the end of the investigation I suspect that many in the regime will face a trial in the world court for their crimes.

The action of the NATO forces has put a dampener on Daffy’s attempts to put down the protests. Daffy has been prepared to lie, and to get his allies to use propaganda against the NATO forces in an effort to cling to power. He has attempted to use the African Union, Chavez, Russia, China, India and other useful idiots in order to get out his propaganda message. It is always the same one: he pretends that NATO is killing civilians. Not once has the Daffy claims been verified. Even the statement coming from the Vatican was based upon false information that was planted by the regime. It was the alleged killing of civilians during NATO strikes that set off the Russians, and gave the leader of the Arab Union a bit of a hissy fit (he has since withdrawn opposition to the attacks once the record was set straight). He has been attempting to use Chavez to make claims that he is attempting to negotiate peace – why should anyone believe the lying hound Chavez? He tried to use the African Union to make peace negotiations, but of course these negotiations were rebuffed – Gadhaffi has to leave. He sent his Deputy Foreign Minister on a mission to Europe and that ended up with Italy deciding to send aircraft to participate in the NATO strikes.

Daffy Duck’s goons have been shelling the civilian areas of Misrata. Hundreds of civilians have died at the hands of the Daffy goons. He had Misrata cut off with the situation being quite desperate, but in the end the goons were pushed back sufficiently for the rebels to retain control of the city, as well as maintaining the control of the port. There have been some evacuations from Misrata, and yes, some equipment has filtered into the town.  However, it is the use of cluster bombs and now the mining of the waters around the port of Misrata that should make people recoil in horror over what Daffy Duck has been doing to his own people in Libya.

These deadly actions by Daffy Duck has not stopped the propaganda from flowing. There has been a never ending flow of propaganda. At first there were promises of a ceasefire. Oh yes, did I mention that when NATO threatened action Daffy declared a ceasefire, and promptly ignored it by firing upon Benghazi? This has been repeated several times in the past few weeks. Now comes the latest in propaganda ploys from Daffy Duck:

He wants to negotiate yet another worthless ceasefire. He wants NATO to stop the bombing.  Here is the latest in a string of lying propaganda from the terrorist Moammar Gadhaffi:

“(Libya) is ready until now to enter a ceasefire … but a ceasefire cannot be from one side,” Mr Gaddafi said, speaking from behind a desk and aided by reams of papers covered in what appeared to be hand-written notes.

“We were the first to welcome a ceasefire and we were the first to accept a ceasefire … but the crusader NATO attack has not stopped,” he said.

“The gate to peace is open.”

What a lying piece of the proverbial mushroom fodder. Truly, this is the man who claims a ceasefire, and then keeps firing. It is not NATO that has refused to stop it is Moammar Gadhaffi who has been stalling for time in order to implement his next diabolical attack upon his own people who will not stop.  The man is getting more and more desperate and he is sounding extremely desperate. He blames NATO, but NATO was not responsible for those mines that have been found in the waters of Misrata!!!!! The mining of the port of Misrata is against International Law, something that is not respected by the terrorist and terrorist sponsor, Moammar Gahdaffi.

The BBC, reporting on the same story gives a slightly different and chilling picture regarding the latest propaganda move from Daffy Duck:

State media later implied that Nato strikes had targeted Col Gaddafi while he was speaking.

Meanwhile, Libya said it will not allow any more sea deliveries to the besieged western city of Misrata.

Government spokesman Moussa Ibrahim also said rebels in the city would be given four days to lay down their arms in return for an amnesty.

If they continued to fight they would face “total fire” he said.

His comments came after Nato said forces loyal to Col Gaddafi had been trying to lay mines off Misrata.

These threats are exactly like the “no mercy” threats uttered against Benghazi. Don’t talk to me about the possibility of some individuals been remotely connected to AQ who are now fighting to save the lives of their townspeople, their families and even their own lives.  The freedom fighters are fighting for their lives, and they are fighting the real terrorist who has used obsfucation like it is a fine art. After all, who do you think started those AQ rumours? It was Daffy Duck who was giving a false impression about those who had been protesting.

 You will find more disturbing stories about how the Daffy Duck regime is treating people in Tripoli here.

Border Patrol

I bet you Americans will be jealous when you read this report about what is happening on the border of Libya and Tunisia. I am joking of course, but it was something that caught my eye:

The fighting in Libya spilled over into neighboring Tunisia early on Friday, as troops loyal to Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi routed rebel fighters at a critical border crossing in the southwest and pursued them into the nearby town of Dehiba, said a rebel fighter who witnessed the events.

The fighting in the southwest began Thursday night and raged into Friday morning, as a “very large force” of Qaddafi soldiers began attacking the strategic Libyan border post at Wazen, a rebel military spokesman, Col. Ahmed Omar Bani, said. The rebels are hoping to use the border post as a supply route for their fighters battling Colonel Qaddafi’s troops in Libya’s western mountain region.

After capturing the crossing from rebels, the Qaddafi loyalists, backed by mortar fire, advanced further on Friday morning into Dehiba, about three miles from the border. The rebel fighter said the Libyans then sent seven pickups into the town but they were halted at a roadblock set up by residents and Tunisian army troops.

The first truck flipped over at the roadblock, he said, while the other six veered off into the desert, where they were stopped by Tunisian troops, who then took the Qaddafi militiamen into custody. It was not immediately clear what the Tunisian army did with the prisoners.

What I find interesting in the report is that the Tunisian army stood with the people and turned the Daffy goons away. They also captured some of them. This is a border incident, but it is a very serious incident because the Libyan Loyalists  crossed the border and were taking action. This could be seen as an escalation of hostilities. It can also be seen that Tunisia is on the side of the civilian population that is being bombarded and fighting for their lives.

Now wouldn’t it be nice if the Mexican army was patrolling the borders in the south of your country so that the drug cartels and the other riff raff could be kept on their side of the border. The action of the Tunisian army should be enough to make you jealous!!

However, on a more serious, and I would say very serious side, in the same report is some very disturbing information regarding Misrata. No, I am not talking about possible Islamists fighting for the lives of their families (who knows there might be a few in Misrata), but I am talking about something far more deadly and serious:

As the two sides fought, Misurata’s troubles appeared to deepen further as NATO said that pro-Qaddafi forces had been caught Friday mining the waters around the harbor, an apparent attempt to harass traffic from the sea, which has been the sole lifeline for a city otherwise cut off by loyalist ground troops.

While pursuing four small boats, NATO forces noticed an object that appeared to be a mine being released into the sea, and later discovered at least two mines in the water, according to an official who asked not to be named in line with the alliance’s policy.

At least one vessel with humanitarian aid scheduled to enter the port on Friday delayed its arrival and waited off the coast for permission from NATO, medical officials in the city said.

Supplies from the sea have been integral to the city’s survival during the two-month siege, as internationally chartered aid ships have delivered food, water, medicine and ambulances, and also evacuated thousands of migrant workers and many wounded Libyans in need of treatment not available in the city.

 ^&*((#####  the air is turning blue as I consider the action here. There are humanitarian ships entering the port of Misrata to pick up stranded immigrants and the wounded. So these Daffy Loyalists have decided to mine the harbour!!!!  Unbelievable.