• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

The Gadhafi speech ....

The Leader and Guide of Revolution is now blaming all the ruckus on Bin Laden who is apparently duping Libyan youth into revolting with drugs and alcohol.

I'm sure all Western powers now throw their weight behind Col. Ghaddafi.:rolleyes:

I have no doubt that Bin Laden will try to exploit the upheavel in the Mid East to his advantage, but saying he is behind it is bat crap crazy.Maybe Ghaddfi is trying for a guest spot on the Glenn Beck show?
 
He's convinced me that I need to go and protest to get Liz to step down!!!

Oh come on...of course she gives the impression of a sweet little old lady, but you and I know she'd have foreign mercenaries butchering us left, right and centre if we started calling for a republic.

I mean, these people can hardly leave their houses can they, let alone speak their brains whenever and wherever they want.

Lizzie and Muammar...birds of a feather...
 
Oh come on...of course she gives the impression of a sweet little old lady, but you and I know she'd have foreign mercenaries butchering us left, right and centre if we started calling for a republic.

I mean, these people can hardly leave their houses can they, let alone speak their brains whenever and wherever they want.

Lizzie and Muammar...birds of a feather...

If we are going to protest we will need to put it off until next year - else we won't get the public holiday for her grandson's wedding or the public holiday I'm sure we'll get for her Jubilee - have to be practical about these things.
 
I heard that if one zooms in on the reflection in his glasses, you can make out that no one is there listening.
 
3 points I would make.

1. Libyan people deserve the best government that can be achieved for them at the moment.
2. The early footage I saw showed not all that many protestors running around with AK-47 and rocket propelled grenade launchers. The media have wised up a little since then and concentrate on only showing unarmed protestors.
3. I also saw a former Libyan minister now part of the opposition saying that he was there when Gaddafi ordered the Lockerbie bombing.

Is the whole point of this exercise to remove the one regime in the world that is loath to slaughter its own civilians and is aware of the propensity of Western governments to gleefully engage in such practices? Then I suspect the answer to #1 is Gaddafi probably still represents the best option for the Libyan people just at the moment. Its a grim world we live in when Gaddafi is a more honest leader than Obama, Blair or Bush, but so it is.
 
Is the whole point of this exercise to remove the one regime in the world that is loath to slaughter its own civilians and is aware of the propensity of Western governments to gleefully engage in such practices? Then I suspect the answer to #1 is Gaddafi probably still represents the best option for the Libyan people just at the moment. Its a grim world we live in when Gaddafi is a more honest leader than Obama, Blair or Bush, but so it is.

Yeah, but let's face it. You're an apologist for Hitler so your words are less than worthless.
 
"I will die a martyr at the end'' - he should be careful sometime wishes come true.

I really hope that he doesn't start what will be a cull, unfortunately we know he is insane enough to do something like that.

That's great Muamar... can you please hurry it the hell up already?
 
...The early footage I saw showed not all that many protestors running around with AK-47 and rocket propelled grenade launchers. The media have wised up a little since then and concentrate on only showing unarmed protestors.
Got any evidence that the fragments of video footage coming out of Libya have been censored to remove armed protesters? I presume not. We know the protesters have siezed control of parts of the country. We've been told they've armed themselves. Got any plausible theory for why news channels (who love cool pictures of people running around with guns) would be "wise" not to show us what we've already been told? Again I predict not.
Is the whole point of this exercise to remove the one regime in the world that is loath to slaughter its own civilians
Well, you would have to ask the people who're rebelling, but I don't believe their motive is to remove a government which is reluctant to kill them. In fact it seems extraordinarily contrarian to suggest that their government is reluctant to kill them. The lack of reliable, independent witnesses is a problem of course and stories like the strafeing of civilians by aircraft are almost certainly false, but reports from hospitals dealing with casualties would appear to show that somebody has been killing protestors, and doing so with some enthusiasm.
 
Got any evidence that the fragments of video footage coming out of Libya have been censored to remove armed protesters? I presume not. We know the protesters have siezed control of parts of the country. We've been told they've armed themselves. Got any plausible theory for why news channels (who love cool pictures of people running around with guns) would be "wise" not to show us what we've already been told? Again I predict not.

Who said anything about censorship? The free media are free to select whatever footage that pleases their shareholders. If you don't like it, go and start your own press agency.

When people start running around with guns, then they are inviting the army to disarm them. That is what happens in every country. You would not like it if people started running around with guns in your country either and would be anxious that they got taken away.

Whoever wins a lot of people are going to die and legitimacy never comes from the barrel of the gun. There was no attempt to try mass peaceful protest but instead of leap was made straight for arms.

Just because of you are afraid about Lockerbie does not give you the right to provoke civil war in Libya and create many more deaths.
 

Back
Top Bottom