Friday, 29 July 2011

RE: Rebel feud puts UK's Libya policy in jeopardy, by Kim Sengupta

Comment on The Independent article by Kim Sengupta, Saturday, 30 July 2011

The breadth of speculation drawn around Younes’ death since your piece on this yesterday, so soon after the National Transitional Council (NTC) confirmed the news, is quite fascinating. Nevertheless, your portrayal of yet another Libya event succeeds in sparing Gaddafi any analytical mention, except as being the victim of the NTC’s blame for the incident - poor Gaddafi.

As you put it “The death of Younes came just a day after the British Government recognised the TNC as the sole representatives of the Libyan state...” Speculation over what exactly happened will not end anytime soon. Theories about the assassination of JFK are abundant to this day. However, here are three advantageous outcomes that could likely have been a motive for Gaddafi to instigate this event:

1.Casting local and international doubts over the National Transitional Council’s political leadership; especially in terms of its authority over Libya’s National Liberation Army.

2.Demoralising opposition troops fighting on Libya’s front lines against Gaddafi’s private forces.

3.Reviving the all important and universal threat of the alleged Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG).

1.The NTC is undoubtedly already in enough of an unenviable position, and under enough pressure, trying to guide Libya’s revolution to meet its political aspirations. The last thing they would need is a scandalous investigation into a suspicious assassination of a closely associated military commander. Whether Gaddafi was directly or indirectly responsible doesn’t change the fact the Younes was killed. The TNC most certainly did not order or carryout such action. The fact that the events which led to this incident were allowed to occur is a tough lesson, they will, without a doubt, have learnt a lot from. Should Gaddafi be behind this incident then he has failed in fracturing the Council’s foundation. Libyan people and foreign governments still give the Council their full backing; concerned as they may rightly be that nothing like this should be allowed to happen again.

2.Freedom fighters at the front lines have not withdrawn from their positions. Their spirits remain high as ever. Younes’ nephew among other close relatives and representatives from his clan affirmed their loyalty to Libya, above all, and their continued determination to fight to the very last man in order to liberate the remaining Libyan cities under Gaddafi’s siege. Several hundred fighters from Younes’ clan remain at their frontline positions along with their fellow extended clan members: “Libyans from all walks of life”.

3.Gaddafi’s State TV announced a few days ago that they were exited to hear good news about Abdul Fattah Younes within 48 hours. International Journalists in Rixos were tweeting, hours before the NTC announced Younes death, that Libyans they were speaking to in the hotel (Gaddafi informers) were spreading news that Al-Qaeda had killed Younes. The LIFG is a terrorist entity formally fabricated by Gaddafi toward the mid 1990s in which he consolidated more or less every one that ever opposed him that also happened to have a beard. Many religious folks hated Gaddafi, there’s no denying that, though hatred of Gaddafi is by no means an exclusive stance. Libya’s opposition in the wake of this revolution has been accused of failing to organise its ranks. How on earth would it have even been imaginable for a militant Islamic network to have coordinated itself and established any formation during Gaddafi’s big brother tyrannical rule? Religious folks got locked up for praying in mosques before dawn, never mind setting up Afghan style training camps. Of course, Libyans that fought the Soviets in the 80’s with the blessing of Gaddafi and the West were certainly not met with hugs and kisses by Gaddafi upon their return. Their military experience didn’t go well with his paranoia. They were persecuted for simply having taken part in the Afghan war and were eventually branded as the LIFG, round about when Islamist Terrorist Groups started to emerge as global public enemy number one. Gaddafi had his very own local common enemy to justify an alliance with the Free-World in the War on Terror, all in preparation for his “reformist” son to take centre stage. The LIFG brand was also stamped on small groups that were involved in sporadic armed skirmishes that took place at regional levels in a handful of Libyan cities; mainly religious folks fighting back at constant harassment and targeting by regime thugs. Gaddafi filled up Bu-Sleem prison with so-called LIFG members detained without charge or trial. Over 1200 inmates were massacred in the prison in 1996; many of the victims were teenagers.

There have been allegations that LIFG has been busy in Iraq. 11 Guantanamo detainees were Libyan. All these individuals were recruited by Gaddafi operatives. Their travel to war zones was facilitated by Gaddafi’s intelligence apparatus; all to get rid of as many angry religious opponents that would otherwise fight Gaddafi if they one day had the chance, which is more or less what is happening now.

The world has bought the LIFG card on many previous occasions. The UK listed them as a proscribed terrorist organization under the Terrorism Act 2000, allegedly responsible for an attempt on Gaddafi’s life in the mid 90s; the same alleged attempt Gaddafi blamed on MI6. Whether Gaddafi succeeds in manipulating Younes’ death, to revive the alleged Islamist Terrorist Al-Qaeda threat that he has so desperately tried to smear Libya’s revolution with, or spark the civil war he vowed would erupt since February as today's article suggests, remains for us to see in the weeks and months ahead? Unless Libyan men fighting Gaddafi make it their business to shave their beards on a daily basis and refrain from chanting “Allah Akbar” to boost their moral, Gaddafi’s PR, in and out of Libya, will continually push for the world to assume that beards and guns in Libya can only mean that the LIFG is on the loose. If this alleged terrorist entity just so happens to rack the blame for killing an opposition commander then that’s a clear advantage for Gaddafi, if not his intent all along.

For reference (clarification of terms used in the piece you wrote on Younes yesterday):

“opposition capital” is Libya’s capital: Tripoli. Benghazi is Libya’s second city which happens to be a liberated city from where the opposition leadership currently operates.

“Shabaab” – Again, the word you’re looking for is ‘Thuwar’ which means revolutionaries, and every Libyan opposed to Gaddafi is doing their bit in this battle which Gaddafi brought upon us. There is no Somalia-based-fanatic-Islamist style group that allegedly won’t even allow aid agencies safe passage to famine struck areas; just ordinary Libyans giving their all for their country. ShababLibya, however, are an online news team. They’re on twitter and Facebook telling the world the truth about Libya – you should check them out sometime, perhaps, if you get a minute between writing your frighteningly favourable appraisals of Gaddafi.

Mustafa Abdul Jalil, a former justice minister under Col Gaddafi... and? Go on; say it... that resigned twice from his post because he wasn’t exactly one for taking orders from the top. But why mention something like that and risk giving the man some retrospective credibility? Surely he’s just as bad as Gaddafi, if not worst, so why not just stick with the devil we know?! At least Gaddafi keeps us safe from the LIFG!

RE: Libyan rebels have conceded ground since bombing began, by Kim Sengupta

Comment on The Independent article by Kim Sengupta, Wednesday, 27 July 2011

"The regime controls around 20 per cent more territory than it did in the immediate aftermath of the uprising on 17 February."

The regime's outright waging of a full blown war on the Libyan people was the said aftermath of the uprising on 17 February. If small towns around Tripoli, such as A'Zawia, that were subsequently raised to the ground, amount to the 20 per cent gain that you allege Gaddafi has added to his accolade of besieged cities, then the world can breathe a sigh of relief that NATO has successfully helped Libya's oppressed population in maintaining and sustaining the liberation of the majority of their country.

However, the arguably inaccurate article title “Libyan rebels have conceded ground since bombing began” brashly implies a vague loss on the part of Libya’s opposition, which effectively indicates to a failure on the part of NATO and a defiant triumph for Gaddafi. The image description on the other hand makes yet another discrediting assertion which goes so far as to claim that “Rebel fighters have lost all the ground they gained against Gaddafi's forces despite the Nato bombing raids”.

Which of these allegations should we believe to actually reflect the terrible loss you seem adamant to bestow on Libya’s opposition and on the NATO mission? Should we go with whichever one presents the mighty Gaddafi in the most glorifying bright green aura his reputation rightfully deserves? Even so, we mail fail to see this materialise from the depths at which the deluding coward currently hides.

Misrata and Nafousa Mountain have exposed Gaddafi’s heretic separatist East alibi in affirming to the world that Libya stands united against Gaddafi’s perverse tyranny. Sadly, international journalists, reporting from the smothered Libyan capital Tripoli, are confined to the now-infamous Rixos hotel and allowed to view, and report, only that which the regime grants. Their constrained reports are almost as “independent” as the stream of journalistic abominations you and few other “independent” journalists have spewed since the US / NATO led operations began. Tripoli’s revolt is at the verge of the serpent’s head. Mauled its truth may be, it will emerge when the serpent’s dead.

The stark contrast between some of the Independent’s articles on Libya prior to and since the implementation of UNSCR 1973 is unfathomable.

I previously stumbled across Patrick Cockburn’s fictional masterpiece “Don’t Believe Everything you See and Read about Gaddafi”. However, your exclusive use of the Arabic word for youth “shabab”, that some unwitting readers could inadvertently associate with Somalia-based rogue militant group “Al-Shabab” and all the negative connotations such groups rightly reap, and hence echoing Gaddafi’s allegations of Libya’s opposition being Al-Qaeda as he initially claimed before he conceded to brand them Christian and Jewish Infidel Crusaders; is quite ingenious though arguably cunning for the standard of integrity, impartiality “independent” journalists would normally adhere to. Perhaps the term you are seeking here is “thuwar”, which means revolutionaries. Indeed, all those risking life and limb in Libya’s frontlines have widely come to be known as Feb17’s “Thuwar” and not shabab; as many of those braving Gaddafi’s merciless wraith, though youthful in spirit, simply bear far too many grey hairs to pass themselves off as youths, or “shabab”.

If anything, Libya’s youth, reassured by what was achieved in Tunisia and Egypt, embarked on what preceding generations of Libyans repeatedly attempted, though only to be discretely crushed. Today’s Libyan shabab are armed with communications and technology. Today’s Libyan shabab realise their universal rights and do not hesitate to face death in order to gain their freedoms, and for their long-scorned nation and nationality to be ridden of the damning smears protracted by Gaddafi and his ghouls. Libya’s shabab are every bit entitled to UN fulfilment of it’s duties and obligations under the provision of international law. The whole Libyan population was reborn on 17 February and has every bit of its liberated youth to look forward to.

I have the next few hours to explore the belatedly discovered journalistic blunders of Kim Sengupta. I am sure that your choice of words, the chronology of your “independent” works will not fail to amuse me, albeit in an infinitely distressing sense of the word.

You are not alone in twisting Gaddafi’s knife, in vain, in the back of every Libyan.

Thursday, 28 July 2011

ليبيا تنزف ولا تزال تثور، فهل للأحزاب أن تنهض بالديمقراطية والدستور؟

رحم الله شهدائنا الفرسان الذين فدوا بما لا يغلى عليها من أثمان فوالله ما كانت نفوسهم بخيصة و لكن كان لحب الوطن على نفوسهم العطرة ما كان ، وبعد ، وفي وجهة نظري الشخصية والتي لا أفترض لها صحة على غيرها من آراء، فلا يزال الإطاحة بالطاغية وزمرته الظالمة الهدف الأول والأخير في هذه المرحلة ، وفي حين تحرير ليبيا من قبضة كتائب معمر القذّافي قد يفترض أن تهدأ وتستقر الأمور بشكل تدريجي خلال مرحلة إنتقالية تحت إشراف المجالس المحليّة و المجلس الوطني الإنتقالي وما تيسر من رعاية ورقابة قانونية من المجتمع الدولي وتغطية إعلامية حيادية محلية وعالمية ومباحثات أكاديمية ترتقي بشؤون الدولة الليبية إلى أرفع وأرقى مستويات الموضوعية والشفافية العملية ، وإن شاء الله بإذن الواحد الأحد تضمد جروح البلاد وتستقل المؤسسات القانونية عنها من العسكرية والسياسية ويعاد تأهيل المؤسسات والمنشآت الإقتصادية والإدارية والإجتماعية والصحية والتعليمية وما إلي ذلك من موارد الحياة الأساسية وعلى أثر ظهور بوادر مجتمع مدني يحبو بالإخلاص للوطن ولدماء شهدائنا الغالية وينعم بالإستقرار النسبي والرفض التام للمحسوبية والقبلية والفساد المالي وإحراز المصالح الشخصية، عند إذٍ ، و الله أعلم ، فالتتوكل على الله ما باتت وما تشكلت من أحزاب سياسية غيورة على المواطن والوطن ولتتنافس بنزاهةٍ وإحسان واحترام متبادل في سبيل السعي والسهر على مصالح وحقوق كل المواطنين بدون استثناء وعلى سلامة كل شبر من أرجاء الوطن.
قد نموت من الإستحياء على أثر ما يلفح وجوهنا من حياء حين ننظر إلي وجوه الشهداء فيما ينشر من صور لجثامينهم الطاهرة تخبّطاً من خوض الليبيين الأحياء في إستباق الأحداث والوقوع بليبيا فيما قد تجلبه العجلة من ندامة، فكم من دولة افريقية تُدعى بالديمقراطية وتمتد فيها طوابير المنتخبين من حفاة وعراة وجياع وجُهّال وتمتلأ فيها صناديق الإقتراع بالاصوات وما ترمز له من أماني وآمال إلّا أنها تزال ذاك الدول الديمقراطية ذاتها ، وما يموج بها بحجة التعددية  الحزبية، دول تتساوى فيها الشعوب بالتراب ويعبث ويتناثر فيها الساسة بلا حساب. عاشت ليبيا
صور لبعض وقائع أول إنتخابات رئاسية مفتوحة تُجرى عام 2006 في جمهوريّة الكونغو الديمقراطية منذ إستقلالها عام 1960

Friday, 15 July 2011

RE: Libyan rebels capture demoralised Gaddafi troops, by David Smith

Comment on Guardian Article by David Smith, Thursday 14 July 2011 19.35 BST

Could this article be any more impartial? The reporter barely describes ancillary events common place across most parts of Libya. Amazing how anyone that doesn’t pander to the inexplicably conclusive notion of Libya’s prodemocracy population being NATO colluding Al-Qaeda Fanatic Racist Corrupt Sell-out Traitor Imperialist Crusading Pill-Popping Rebels is shrugged away as being a propagandist?! Libya’s opposition was apparently rightly persecuted during the apparently immaculate reality that Gaddafi bestowed upon Libya since 1969. No one need report anything that contradicts with complete and utter harmony inside Libya and pure animosity from all of the world’s evil empires. Libyans worshiped Gaddafi happily ever after and were titillated by the prospect of his sons trampling all over Libyan generations to come. A dozen impartial articles about Libya’s crisis in the Guardian is just far too much propaganda unfairly portraying Gaddafi in such a negative at the expense of glorifying the malignant rebels and presenting their undeserving treachery in way too high a regard. Perhaps Gaddafi apologists would be delighted to know that Libya’s billions remain Gaddafi’s frozen assets and that the coalition handover to NATO gave Gaddafi just enough time to sneak into Misrata in the hope of fulfilling the East v West myth. Perhaps Gaddafi apologists should also expect that the political and military opposition bodies, that formed in the wake of Gaddafi’s violent crackdown on what was a popular and peaceful call for reform, are very likely to suffer from incompetence engrained in Libya’s national institutions during Gaddafi’s era.

Of course some Libyans support Gaddafi, they have everything to lose. They also have influence over the indifferent simpletons that have been conditioned to accept no more than getting by from day to day. Some Libyans supported Mussolini during the Italian occupation. I don’t think their support for Italy’s dictator influenced Italy’s public opinion at the time. Perhaps Gaddafi’s worshipers view Mussolini’s infamous fate in a regretful manner. From an alleged former CIA agent to an expelled member of the BNP, from grassroots antiwar activist to a civil rights advocate Senator; Gaddafi’s got them eating out of his blood drenched hands. Perhaps money really does talk. We Libyan’s wish the alleged “Mad-Dog” wasn’t armed to the teeth by the world’s conscientious and civilized nations. We wish that the very hand that claims to be at the aide of us Libyans in our current plight didn’t also meddle with our fortitude and our reputation. In pure practical terms we wish that our assets would be at our disposal so that we could fight our own battle. The hundreds of millions Tax Payers have been led to panic about are paid for in advance. Gaddafi’s front company, the Libyan Investment Authority, haemorrhaged plenty into World Investments over the past ten years. Gaddafi’s alleged reform in the eyes of the international community, even a seat on the UN human rights council, also came at a hefty cost.

Sadly, the ways of the world we live in today are as much of an imposition on Libyans, and other nations, as Gaddafi himself. The powers that be grow secluded tumours and only they have the means to operate but only to diminish these incurable growths. Libya in the meantime is under sedation, oblivious to the world’s long standing political prejudices and competing interests. In the best of outcomes, Gaddafi, his sons and their immediate assailants will be eradicated. Us Libyans will indeed be left to cope with the side effects of this uprising in the hope that none of these are permanent. In the process, Gaddafi’s 42 year wraith will soon become sad and forsaken history.

The Day Gaddafi Gains the Moral High Ground [WARNING: GRAPHIC]

Young boy killed in Nalut, Nafousa Mountain, on Wednesday, 13 July 2011, by Gaddafi's ongoing shelling of civilians.

Following reports in Russian press, that emerged yesterday, 14 July 2011, quoting the Kremlin’s special envoy to Libya, Mikhail Margelov, on an alleged suicidal plan by Gaddafi’s regime, which would see to the destruction of Tripoli in the event that opposition fighters from surrounding cities managed to infiltrate the capital, a Gaddafi regime official has been quick to deny any such allegations claiming that the alleged Russian source, Mikhail Margelov, himself has since denied making any such claim. As reassuring as this may arguably seem, Gaddafi’s repeated denial of military operations to date has only proven to be affirmation of the contrary. This coincides with yet another televised voice recording by Gaddafi; jam-packed with threats and obnoxiousness. Sadly, in comparison to recent similarly revolting claims and threats aimed at Europe, Gaddafi’s latest outburst seems to have gone unnoticed. This would not be the first bombshell that commentators and analysts, politicians and activists seem to bypass. However, Misrata, among tens of other Libyan cities and towns, is a live witness to Gaddafi’s motives. The human cost of Gaddafi’s desperately orchestrated continuous indiscriminate military assault on Libya’s civilian population has been completely overshadowed by socioeconomic and geopolitical smokescreens adamant on portraying a balanced armed conflict between two equal sides. These sides have been portrayed as being equally culpable for alleged human rights violations, war crimes and crimes against humanity. The fact that there would be no armed conflict were it not for Gaddafi’s full scale military provocation that came as a response to peaceful pro-democracy protests in mid February.

Hours of independently verifiable footage, from Libya’s frontlines, has become abundantly available in recent months. Horrific images of the human cost caused by Gaddafi’s delusional megalomania. Yet, somehow, barely any shocking images are being relayed to the world. Amid speculative debate over costs to Tax Payers, and avoiding the repeated mistake of previous, though entirely dissimilar, military interventions, public opinion has notably been left out of touch with the pending humanitarian plight of people in Libya and their unquestionably just cause. Gaddafi’s state media has been consistently referenced. World renowned broadcasters, including the BBC, have gone as far as to show actual-footage from Gaddafi’s channels, whilst reiterating to their diverse audiences the exact message intended by Gaddafi’s dubious PR. Most notably, Gaddafi’s stage-managed and vastly resources alleged mass march in Tripoli’s Green Square on 1 July. The BBC saw it reasonable, impartial and necessary to inform its viewers of alleged mass support for Gaddafi in Tripoli, without any independent verification, presumably attended by Tripoli residents that happen to be Libyan. This however was far from the truth; as numerous amateur videos uploaded to YouTube by members of the crowd revealed shortly after the demo ended. On the contrary, spontaneous mass demonstrations that took to the streets in Misrata and Benghazi, among other liberated cities, on 6 July, in response to Gaddafi’s fabrication and intimidation, did not even get a brief mention on the global media stage. One cannot help but ask how such an partial and imbalanced portrayal could possibly be allowed by the supposedly impartial free press? If anything, global spectators are being alluded into reassessing their stance on Libya’s popular uprising based on repeated images of regime-assembled-conditioned-crowds waving Green flags and Gaddafi’s pictures rivalled by handfuls of “rag tag armed rebels” driving pickup trucks in the middle of nowhere.

Many mainstream media outlets were spoon fed links to online independent Libyan news sources that emerged since the start of the revolution. Hardly any utilisation of images or video resources from these sites has been ensued by mainstream media; to produce documentaries or use as to investigate in special reports. Gaddafi’s series of PR stunts recently featured the alleged tragic death of the family of Khwaildy Elhimaidi, a high-ranking military official, by a NATO airstrike. Images of the victims’ corpses have become banner fronts in anti-NATO and pro-Gaddafi demos in and outside of Libya. However, early reports from Libyan sources, of Gaddafi keeping families of high-ranking officials under house arrest to deter them from defections, and using their residences as disseminated weapons depots to stifle NATO efficiencies, were never echoed by international media nor have they been addressed in the aftermath of such alleged tragic deaths. Once again, this has granted Gaddafi undeserved PR leverage, especially during the absence of any holistic coverage of damage and death caused by Gaddafi on a daily basis. Indeed, thousands of Libyan children been injured and killed by Gaddafi’s vicious offensive. However, images of these innocent victims are not being exposed to the world. Gaddafi’s sheer evil, and relentless manipulation of events, is not being countered with any decisive effect.

One of the latest growing trends in media coverage has been the emphasis on arguably vague reports issued by Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch about alleged retaliation by Libyan opposition towards captured Gaddafi troops; or even alleged civilian Gaddafi supporters. Somehow, despite these reports not being conclusive by any means, and merely forming only part of the range of such reports issued on Libya, which mostly reaffirm the scale of Gaddafi’s systematic violations of international law, the media seems adamant to convince the world that the wrongs of Libya’s opposition are on a par with those of Gaddafi. Sadly, even where isolated violations are committed by specific individuals among the lines of Libya’s opposition fighters, the scale of these violations is exaggerated to the point of overshadowing Gaddafi’s malicious and systematic conduct in the eyes of the press; and the public that naturally follow. The media’s choice of words is also an arguable point of distortion. Libya’s pro-democracy protestors, whom were eventually forced in to fighting for their safety and survival, were branded rebels from day one. However, an exception to this stereotyping emerged after over four months in to the armed conflict, when France was reported to have armed Libyan “civilians” in the Nafousa Mountain. It is very odd indeed, that it took France to arm Libya’s allegedly armed rebels for the media to brand Libya’s, by then, opposition fighters as “civilians”.

Terminology trivia aside, Gaddafi is responsible for the demise of more human lives, from all around the world, than even the largest terrorist organisations of our time. Nevertheless, Gaddafi still seems to exploit the media; as he did throughout the past 4 decades. Unfortunately, Gaddafi’s wave of audio messages is not gaining a fraction of the attention some of his terrorist counterparts gained in recent times. If Libyans continue to be deprived of their nations assets, which have allegedly been frozen under UNSCR 1970, then Libya’s liberated cities, which currently form the majority of Libyan cities, will begin to destabilise. As Libya’s liberated populations fail to sense any material benefit for the immense sacrifice many of their loved ones have selflessly and courageously made, the revolution could soon face the risk of being starved both economically and logistically due to the lack of financial and political authority, and morally due to the escalation of presupposed erroneous media convictions. Could that be the day Gaddafi gains the moral high ground?
Young girl killed in Shahat, Green Mountain, on Thursday, 17 February 2011, by Gaddafi troops opening fire on initial peaceful protests.

This post, with the exception of the images featured on this blog, was sent as an open letter, via email, to over 50 international news agencies on Friday 15 July 2011 at 10:27 AM GMT.

Sunday, 10 July 2011

Battered Wife Syndrome in Libya’s Conundrum

Disclaimer: This video is unfortunately one of far too many distressing clips captured by Gaddafi's troops. However, it does not by any means illustrate the full extent of violent extremity ensued in the wake of Libya’s uprising.

Gaddafi’s degrading treatment of Libya’s civilian population is deep rooted in all his assailants. From his diplomatic aides to his foot troops, the approach is consistently vulgar. Any Libyan that is suspected of opposing the regime’s ideology, even by the most peaceful means, is a legitimate captive. Age, mental or physical variations are not accounted for. Libyans are under a profoundly unfair proposition: to either obey Gaddafi or expect the worst. In light of Libya’s current crisis, many analysts, activists and academics have recently refreshed the world’s memories with Gaddafi’s record of alleged wrongdoings. Handfuls of incidents known worldwide have been presented with notions of Western conspiracy; Lockerbie, probably the most famous of all. Libya’s uprising, still hot off its heels, has quickly become a predictable episode in a foretelling tale of New World Order. Geopolitical, economical, religious and even racial vendettas have all inexplicably enchained the humble aspirations of the Libyan people. It seems that even supposedly frozen money still talks and in many languages too; tirelessly buying influence and time. The plight of Libya’s civilian population could be drawn in a parallel to that of a battered wife. Libya’s wounds, inflicted over 4 unforgiving decades by the ridiculed Brother Leader, are visible to those that rightly despise him and invisible to those that out-of-spite still choose to admire him.

Libya’s belated roar, in the face of the tyrant it no longer fears, has reaped far too much scepticism for any such thing as a ‘global conscience’ to be counted on. Other helpless populations, too, battered wives and abused children in their own right, have been butchered by their very own; under the guise of sovereignty, not for the state, but for the head of the household’s inherent throne. If only the heads of these global households were merely consumed by self-indulgence, their peoples might just be able to gain the understanding of neighbouring spectators; in the hope of seeking at least moral support from abroad. However, these heads of state are in bed with each other and in bed with the media and in bed with the banks and in bed with the law. Therefore, their actions at home are national affairs. Their not-so-distant pasts are worthy of doubt and may have never occurred. Perhaps Gaddafi sympathisers genuinely believe that he, his sons or associates are in any way viable political foes that could be lured into some sort of political dialogue? If so, I hope that the above distressing video comes as a slap to their faces; as unjustly endured by the unfortunate captives it features.

Gaddafi’s admirers have tended to judge him and his sons on their performances during brief and carefully orchestrated recent media appearances. Gaddafi advocates, either extortionately paid or acutely delusional, were quick to their guns aiming to bring down Libya’s liberated population by nitpicking at every imaginable glitch or flaw on their behalf; in the havoc of Gaddafi’s violent repression of their otherwise peaceful uprising. Sadly, as a Judge could conclude in a case of manslaughter, a battered wife would have only ever behaved violently or irrationally due to the provocation of her other half’s discrete and deliberate torment. Gaddafi’s foreign apologists unashamedly reiterate that Libyans love their Brother Leader and that their household is perfectly intact. Whether little do they know or much do they deny, the battered wife in every Libyan is an irrefutable fact, and, for our irrevocable hurt alone, violent revolution is our only remaining choice of act.

Friday, 8 July 2011

Trace the Historic Path, Consider the Current Context and, by God, do the Math!

Here's my view on the quantification of Libya's stance on Gaddafi:

55% of Libyans are against Gaddafi, are not afraid to say it and would rather die than live under his or his sons' rule (especially after 17th Feb). 30% are indifferent to whoever is in power (this segment tends to go with the flow, the same way as they chanted for Mussolini a long time ago!) 15% support Gaddafi because they have everything to lose, and by everything I mean money and weapons (absolute power). The 30% passive population will jump as high as the 15% ruthless elite will order or threaten them to do so. The 55% opposition still can't access Libya's assets (openly referred to by the international community as Gaddafi's frozen assets... so much for TNC recognition!) and without a major coordinated diplomatic, military and MEDIA effort (which will cost billions!), the 15% corrupt elite will continue to manipulate the hell out of the situation on the ground. Gaddafi's PR/lobbyists are still at work the world around, albeit very discreetly! Of course, if Libyan citizenship, money and land are being promised to loyal supporters from neighbouring African/Arab countries then, God forbid, Gaddafi's propaganda will only become more and more convincing.

Benghazi, 6 July 2011

Tripoli, 1 July 2011

Conditioned Libyan crowds cheer for Gaddafi today as they did for Mussolini a long time ago.

RE: Nato's real plan for Libya, by Tom Dale

by Enes Senussi 5 July 2011 12:27 AM

Comment on Guardian Article by Tom Dale, Monday 4 July 2011 21.02 BST

The Transitional National Council didn’t emerge over night. It was the result of local councils that formed in the aftermath of Gaddafi’s collapse across the majority of Libya’s cities between mid February and early March this year. The enforcement of the “No Fly Zone” was deliberately drafted to incorporate the potential wide interpretation of “any means necessary” to protect Libyan civilians, and rightly so, considering the irrational nature of Gaddafi and his sons. Leftwing / Socialist Gaddafi apologists don’t seem to mind Libyan casualties in their thousands so long as Gaddafi is responsible for their deaths; as though the brother leader knew best and his opponents rightly deserve what they get. The fact is that NATO’s record is riddled with hundreds of thousands of innocent lives claimed during arguably unrelated missions in other parts of the world. Many people are rightly enraged by the seemingly expanding military might of reckless imperialist Western powers. However, almost every alleged incident of civilian casualties caused by NATO air strikes, as claimed by Gaddafi’s regime, has been meddled with in one way or another to score much needed points on their desperate media front.

French, British and US intervention gave Libya’s otherwise peaceful demand for reform (yes, it wasn’t even labeled or intended to overthrow the regime – “Feb 17 Day of Rage against Corruption and Extortion”) a new lease of life and prevented inevitable major atrocities, especially across Libya’s eastern cities. Western cities and regions such as Misrata, Zawia and the Western Mountains have been less fortunate. Gaddafi’s bombardment has been frequently sustained despite NATO’s operation and despite Gaddafi’s alleged calls for ceasefires.

Please give the tempting conspiracy theories a pass on Libya’s, now violent, revolution. It would be interesting for the swarm of commentators, so readily able to expose Libya’s recent civilian uprising for the alleged CIA plot that it apparently is, to shed some light on how Gaddafi came to power in the first place? Perhaps shed some light on Gaddafi’s time in the UK prior to his infamous bloodless coup, for instance. Generations of Libyans understood how evil Gaddafi was. Younger generations could have been somewhat out of touch with Gaddafi's wraith. These youths, either very brave or plain naive, saw Tunisia, Egypt and Yemen and thought they ought to give it a try. Seeing how far it has come in a matter of months has reintroduced even those only too familiar with Gaddafi's evil to a tyrant more brutal and insane than anyone had imagined.

Give or take 55% of Libyans would rather die than live under Gaddafi’s rule post 17 Feb 2011. However, 30% are inherently indifferent. Even Mussolini was once met by cheering crowds in cities across Libya during the Italian occupation. Some things don’t seem to change. 15% are indeed diehard Gaddafi worshipers, armed to the teeth, financially established, well connected and engrained with conviction of Gaddafi’s deity; his sons and his close circle of relatives and friends. Given the PR support that this influential minority still commands it is no surprise that the passive Libyan population, especially in cities still under Gaddafi’s military siege, is poised to wave the green flag and chant for Gaddafi.

Libya’s opposition doesn’t want to fall for Gaddafi’s propaganda, which would only further confuse civilian simpletons. After all, Gaddafi has branded his opposition as armed light-skinned racist Al-Qai'da pill-popping imperialist crusading Eastern traitors and NATO slaves, etc. the last thing Libya needs is to fall into any divide over Gaddafi and his mob. They will run out of steam. Who knows, maybe the tens of thousands of Tripoli activists detained since February will find a way out? The possibilities may be few and far between, given the odds of what Gaddafi and his sons have to lose (everything) but only one outcome is inevitable: Gaddafi will fall, Libya will rise. The minority volatile-elite would not have survived this long were it not for Gaddafi’s state TV still airing, African Union backhanding and Russian and Chinese political bargaining with their age old nemesis capitalist West all at the expense of the Libyan people; as though the past 42 years haven’t been painful and depressing enough.

Tom Dale, your journalistic integrity is appreciated; a far cry from the likes of Patrick Cockburn & Co.

RE: "Should the US continue its intervention in Libya?"

by Enes Senussi, 20 June 2011 5:54 AM

Comment on Guardian Opinion Poll: Sunday, 19 June 2011 16.06 BST

Perhaps the world is obliged to cast a procedural blind eye on Libya as it did and continues to do on other states. Financially, times are hard and any potential long term military action in Libya will only add to the pinch tax payers are already feeling. In fact, if the world reverts back to its recent favourable guise, of Gaddafi and his sons being reformists, business associates and strategic allies, Guardian readers, among other circles, might feel better about themselves for saving the world from yet another seemingly indefinite war, which can’t be good for the environment. However, as it happens, Libya’s youth didn’t take into account the topical concerns of political affiliations the word around nor of international law. They had no control over their nation’s assets and were oblivious to the extent of violence Gaddafi would be willing to use, in order to crush any Tunisia or Egypt style demonstrations, when hundreds of youths would dare speak out in such fashion in Benghazi. Hate the UN, NATO or any other coalition on grounds of hypocrisy and/or prior failures. Sympathise with Gaddafi, his UK educated sons and cousin-spokesman Musa Ibrahim. Some sympathise with Hitler, arguably to that effect. Even go as far as to wish for the Libyan population the same fate as other peoples that inescapably bore the brunt of outright genocide. Nonetheless, Libyans might at least deserve the world’s acknowledgement of the reality of how Libya’s uprising began and the engrained calls for political reform that left the nation’s population ripe for revolution. Please separate facts from fallacies before you choose to care less about Libya. Sympathy or support is not obligatory. Tarnish and underestimation add insult to injury.

In mid February, shortly before Libya made the news, peaceful protestors were indiscriminately mutilated. Outraged at the aftermath of the massacres committed by Gaddafi’s forces, some local military ranks quickly defected. The incidental armed resistance that followed merely repelled Gaddafi forces sent to crush the initial protests. Meanwhile civilians in Tripoli, Misrata, Nafousa Mountains, etc. (you basically can’t get any farther west than that) all took to the streets en masse and were met with even more brutality due to the majority of Gaddafi’s fire power being based in Tripoli. Defected military personnel joined by armed volunteers in the east soon advanced west towards Tripoli thinking more defections in the ranks would join them along the way. That didn’t happen because a huge chunk of Gaddafi's military is based in Sirte, slap bang in the middle of the country, so the folks from the east were stopped in their tracks. Internet and phones were cut off and Gaddafi’s PR machine went with the Al-Qaeda/Druggies theme at first to try and convince Libyan viewers living in isolation that Gaddafi was fending off an invasion (this would later become the crusading aggressor!). Several of Gaddafi’s air force eventually refused orders to strike cities in revolt. Defected pilots landed in Malta as well as Benghazi. Gaddafi portrayed to the world that the west of the country was on his side and that the "eastern fanatic rebels" were seeking to establish their own state to takeover oil resources (foreign journalists were allowed into Tripoli under state supervision and behold the series of staged pay per demonstrator green parades affirming Gaddafi’s popularity in the west of Libya!). A considerable number of battalions were subsequently sent to discipline Benghazi and the newly liberated east of the country (counting on the western cities to be easily crushed such as A’zawia, Misrata, etc.). This coincided with Gaddafi and his son both vowing on state TV in mid March to kill the stray dogs and rats (Libyan people that oppose them). Scores of political defections and mounting global protests, even from left wing anti war groups originally cross with Blair’s deal in the desert and the role that that and other reckless arms deals play in embattling oppressed populations, all added to the call for someone to do something quick. The West panicked over the inevitable political vacuum that would replace Gaddafi. Libyan intellectuals from all walks of life rose to the challenge and stepped in to help make sure the country’s youth didn’t die in vain. However, the leftwing branded Libya’s opposition as capitalist opportunists, imperialist stooges and NATO Slaves?! Sadly, Libya’s ambitions now appear to be too much of a burden for the world after 4 months of revolution and 3 months of military intervention. Despite huge sacrifices and advances towards Libya’s adjourned liberation, public opinion seems fraught with nepotism putting it as though Gaddafi’s 4 decades of immaculate evil were a breeze. After all, how much money did the world accumulate from Gaddafi’s payouts since his extrinsically devised bloodless coup in 1969?

I wish I wasn't grieving over close friends and relatives killed in Gaddafi's current onslaught. I wish I was just getting over the ones executed on live television when I was a kid and the ones that disappeared throughout my youth. I wish I could come face to face with every person on Gaddafi's payroll typing or copying and pasting the consistent stream of untruths, about my country and its misconstrued cause, present in almost every online news source comment stream. As for those who believe Libya is to blame for a recent job loss or those who bear a grudge against Gaddafi’s apparent foes (NATO), and are therefore inclined to side with Gaddafi or are indifferent as to what the outcome of this revolution is, I’d rather pass in the hope that you never have to endure the rule of a malignant self-proclaimed deity.

Tyranny: Money, God and Irony.

by Enes Senussi on Sunday, 24 April 2011 at 22:20

Could it have ever been a matter of days or weeks,
for tyranny to topple from imperial peaks?
The powers that be bear a past that reeks of hypocrisy
and a present witness to the bloody havoc it wreaks.
Beleaguered hereditary scores to be settled
leave little room for sympathy toward sufferers trodden and ammo riddled.
Political demise at the loaded barrels of corrupt enterprise aligned under the merciful guise
of dialogue in the face of impetuous violence; seemingly on a continuous rise.
Conscious silence and self-proclaimed grace over those left for dead
with nothing but hope in a pledge conceived and kept alive by devious lies.

Defaced alibis doubt indigenous grounds
for millions to stand against tyranny’s lethal bounds.
Money, God and Irony pinpoint senseless debate;
every incident in history must conspicuously relate.
Payrolls transpire rhetorical fallacies;
swarms of intellectual parasites unashamedly state.
Subjective events funnelled into foretelling precedents
for the factual exclusion of an accidentally receptive audience.
Leftwing and right both ready for a fight;
damning accusations hurled to spite a nation’s dreadful plight.
PR machines across the globe spree,
if the cost’s coughed up propaganda goes probe-free.
If the sanctity of human life was objectively preserved,
perhaps truths would be observed as opposed to idols blindly served.

أما لنا أن نعيا؟

by Enes Senussi on Friday, 22 April 2011 at 17:05
نقاش لبعض الآراء الدائرة حول "مقترح بتسمية ميدان في مصراته باسماء المصورين الغربيين الذين اتوا لنقل الحقيقة وجرائم كتائب القذافي للعالم من مصراته الباسلة" كما ورد في المنارة الإعلاميّة الرئيسيّه بتاريخ 1‏2/‏ 04 /2011
لا تزال قبضة معمر القذافي على الشعب الليبي تفتِك بالاطلاعات الاجتماعية و الثقافية و النفسية لدى العديد من الليبيين حتى ولو تمكنوا وبحمد الله من كسر قيود الولاء المغرر و الصمت المجبر. فقد سُلبت المفاهيم السياسية من أجيال عديدة من الليبيّين على مدى العقود الأربعة الماضية، و لا تزال تخفى علينا. و لهذا نرى اليوم كيف يُمكن للقذافي الانفراد بالمواطنين الليبيين ليس فقط بالآلة الحربية فحسب؛ فتلك الآلة يمكن رؤيتها ورؤية ما تحيذ من دمار إلى أن يأذن الله بدحرها، ولكن بتغييب الوعي بسياق الأحداث و الإدراك بالسبل السياسيه و التقدير لأهميّة دور الإعلام و الذي بات جزءاً لا يتجزأ من ساحات المعارك بين الحق و الباطل، والذي قد يُشكل غيابه أو سؤ استخدامه العديد من المخاطر.
فلِما لا نعيَ بأهمية الإعلام و نثابر من أجل التمكن من استخدامه كما تمكن الثوار الأبطال من المواجهة المسلحة على أرض الواقع؟ إن التقيّد بمفاهيم الطاغية من تخوين و تغبين و تجهيل و ترويع قد يؤدي إلى عزل الثوار و بقيّة الشعب الليبي الأحرار عن أنظار العالم و قطع ما أنعم الله علينا به من دعم و سند و تعاطف و تأييد من شتى الشعوب.
و لن يتوانى الطاغية و لو للحظة عن سلب الإعلام و تسخيره لنشر ما يريد من بهتان و زور يشين به نوايانا و يتمادى به على الثوار وما قدموه من تضحيات من أجْل حريّة الوطن.
لقد روى القذافي ما رواه عن الجهاد الليبي ضد الإستعمار الإيطالي، فمزج تاريخ الجهاد البطولي بأكاذيب لا أساس لها من الصحة؛ فمحى أسماء و شوه أسماء. و لا ننسى كيف شوه معالم الاستقلال الليبي و سوَّد اسماء الأبطال الذين اتو به و ما إلى ذلك من إجلاء للقواعد البريطانيّة و الأمريكيّة. و ها هو اليوم يزداد إمعاناً في تزوير الوقائع؛ فالقذافي يكذب على العالم و يقول أنه مستهدف من قبل جماعات إرهابيّة و أنّ الإنحياز له هو الخيار الأفضل للإنسانيّه، حتى أنه و بعد عقود أدعى خلالها تبنيه القضية الفلسطينية يحذر من أن في سقوطه خطر على إسرايل. ثم يلتفت إلى اليبيّين كاذباَ فيقول أنه مستهدف من قبل حملة صليبيّة إمبرياليّة.

فما دام الشعب الليبي ولو بكل حسن نيّه يبني ردّات الفعل اللحظية و المواقف الآنيّة في إطار الحرب الإعلامية الخائضة على الساحة الدوليّة على النهج الإنزوائي المُدبّر المدسوس الذي اصطنعه القذّافي، فإننا و بأيدينا و بكل غفلة منّا قد نحقق له أهدافه الشيطانيّه التي تضر بثورة الشباب و بمستقبل ليبيا ولو بشكل قد يبدو غير مباشر.فوالله يا ليبيا لقد حُرمتي طويلاً من حرية التفكير والتمعن والتمحيص والأخذ و العطاء فكيف لنا أن نستهين بكيد من توعدك بأنهار الدماء.
أما آن لنا بعد أن أشهرنا موقفنا الرافض لطغيان القذافي و بذلنا و مازلنا نبذل الغالي و الرخيص من أجل تخليص الوطن من طغيانه أن نرتقي على المبادئ الخادعه و المراسم الخاوية التي اُنتُهك بها القالب التربوي لمفهوم الوطنيّة الليبيّة و الخلق الإسلامي؟
كلنا على يقين من أن أجدادنا قاتلوا الإستعمارالفاشي الإيطالي عقوداً طويلة من أجل تحرير الوطن، وأن حريّة و إستقلال الوطن قد تحققا حين انهزم الطليان على أيدي أجدادنا المجاهدين الليبيّين الذين تمكنوا من الإنتصار بالعزيمة القوية رغم قلّة الأسلحه والإمكانيّات، لا جدال في ذلك. و لكن اليقين الذي أناطت ثورة السابع عشر من فبراير اللثام عنه هو كذب و افتراء القذافي و الذي لم يحترم إدراك الليبيّين و لو للحظة واحده طيلة العقود الأربعة الماضية، يحتم علينا التحقق من كل الأفكار و المناهج التي غدى هو و أزلامه على ترسيخها في عقول الليبيّين. و كما أشرت سالفاً، فحتى تاريخ الجهاد الليبي لم يسلم من افتراء القذافي؛ حيث تم تدوين الجهاد الليبي بشكل سطحي يستخف بالعقول، لا بل يشذ عن ما شوهد و سُجِل من أحداث عالميّة محيطة بليبيا في تلك الحقبة العصيبة من تاريخ الوطن و البشريّة أجمع أثناء الحربين العالميتين. فحسب نهج القذافي التعتيمي ليس هناك لمجريات أحداث الحرب العالميّة الثانيّة أية صلة بهزيمة الفاشية في ليبيا، و كأن ما حصل في ليبيا كان على كوكب آخر، في حين أن العالم بأكمله يدري تماماً ما حصل آن ذاك.
فالفاشيّة لقت هزيمتها مع النازيّة على أيدي الحلفاء بريطانيا أمريكا و فرنسا، كما كان لبريطانيا دور فعّال في استقلال ليبيا إثر تحالف المجاهدين الليبيين مع الجيش البريطاني ضد الفاشيّة و النازيّة. في ظل هذه الأحداث و الوقائع العالميّة فإنه لا يليق بنا كليبيين أحرار أن نفكر أو نقرر وفقاً لتداعيات نظام القذافي المضلِل، فإلى متى ستطوقنا مزاعمه المسمومة؟ قامت ثورة الشباب تصرخ رفضاً لكل اشكال الضيم، أمايزال فينا من يعطي اعتباراً لمعايير الطاغية فيخوِّن الثوار أو المجلس الوطني لتعاونهم مع الدول أو المؤسسات الأجنبية وفقاً للقوانين الدولية، و ذلك لحقن دماء الليبيين و وضع حد لمأساتهم الإنسانية؟ أليس من حق الشعب الليبي الانتفاع بما يقدمه المجتمع الدولي بعد أن أعلن من خلال ثورته جدارته في الانتماء لهذا المجتمع؟ إن الشعب الليبي أولى بما قد يقدمه العالم من مبادرات، سواء أكانت إنسانية أو سياسية أو لوجستية أو معنوية. الله أكبر و استطاع الثوار رغم الصعاب رفع راية الاستقلال و الحرية. و حاشَ لله أن يكون للقذافي و لو ذرة وهمية يتطاول بها على القوة و الارادة الوطنية الليبية العسكرية منها أو السياسية أو العقائدية.
ما أراد الطاغية بتجهيل و عزلة الشعب الليبي إلاَّ أن يجرد تاريخ ليبيا من أي فعاليّة سياسية أو دبلوماسيّة ساهمت في دعم و إستمراريّة الجهاد إلى أن تحررت ليبيا من الإستعمار، ففي جماهيريته المزعومة لم تؤخذ الأمور إلاَّ بالقوة والعنف و ذلك كما ورد عن الطاغيّة حال أجدادنا من قبلنا. و على هذا النهج المغرِر لم يسلم من تشويه القذافي سوى البضع القليل من المجاهدين و المناضلين في تاريخ ليبيا، فحتّى شيخ الشهداء عمر المختار رحمه الله وما تجتبيه فضيلته من تقدير وإحترام، فأُنشدت سيرته فى مدح بومنيار قبل أن يلحق بضريحه الخراب و الدمار. أما عدا ذلك فرُمى بهم في الهاوية؛ فمن تسيّس من الأجداد كُتب خائناً لدى الطاغية القذافي و وُصِف بحب المال و بيع الوطن و ما إلى ذلك من ابشع التهم، ثم أقنع الليبيين أنّ انقلابه سيرفع عنهم كل المحن.
فالحذر كل الحذر من ديوان التخوين، فلا يُقصد من هكذا مقترح سوى شد أزر الليبيين. فمن لم يدرك بعد حاجة الحرب لكسب آراء الملايين، فله في صهيون العبرة و كيف مكنّهم الإعلام من وأد فلسطين. أسماء الشهداء خالدة في قلوبنا و هم أحياء عند ربهم يرزقون. فلنثني على الإنسانيّة كرماً ممن سمّاهم الطاغية إرهابيين كي يضيق الخناق عليه و يدرك العالم بعد ظلمةٍ من هم حقّاً الليبيين.
و كما على الأجداد افترى، فما هو إلا شرف لمن ظُن به سوء بمعيار الشرف و الإخلاص عند الطاغية الذي لم يسلم من تخوينه ثوارنا الأشاوس على مرء و مسمع من العالم. فما بقى للطاغية أن يتمادى في الإساءة لسمعة الثوار؟
سبق و أن اختلطت الدماء القطريّة و الليبية في بنغازي حين إستشهاد مصور الجزيرة علي حسن الجابر رحمه الله، فما كان من الجماهير الليبية إلا أن زفت جثمانه في جنازةٍ تليق بتضحيته. بينما قبل مرور يوم واحد على مقتل و إصابة المصورين البريطاني و الأمريكي في مصراته المجاهدة، ما كان من العناصر الإعلاميّة التي اشتراها القذافي إلّا و أنْ بدأت بنشر التقارير عن إحتمال تورط الثوار في هذه الحادثة. حتى أنهم إدعوا أن آخر الكلمات الواردة من أحد المصورين على موقع التويتر كانت قد كُتبت من قبل الثوار من أجل إيصال روايتهم للأحداث في مصراته على غرار ما يرويه نظام القذافي.
فسبحان الله، كيف لنا أن نعطي الفرصة للقذافي و لو بكلمة واحدة في الساحة الإعلاميّه الدوليّة كي يبث سمومه للعالم و الناس؟ إنه من ادّعى إجلائه للاستعمار بينما استعمر البلاد و اغتصب خيراتها، و ادعى قوميّته العربية وشرعيّتة الإسلامية في حين أن ولائه التام و المطلق كان و مازال للصهيونيّة. فكما جرّد البلاد من المؤسسات المدنية و العسكرية بأُطروحاته الزائفة، ها هو وأبنائه و أزلامهم يبتزون المواطنين العزل بالشعارات البائسة و التي تتلاعب بطيبة نوايا الليبيين و تأنيب ضمائرهم الحية، حتى في ما قد يمكن إعتباره نعمة من عند الله.
إن القصد و الهدف من هكذا بادرة هو إثارة المشاعر المؤيدة للثوّار عالمياً وكشف شرور القذافي أمام البشرية جمعاء فما تخفى على الله من خافية، فدعونا لا نحرم بلادنا بطِيبتنا من حقوق و صلاحيات مُنحت لنا وفق القانون الدولي. ليس من المُخزِ لليبيّين الاستفادة مما يُقدّم لهم من دعم أجنبي، إلاَّ إذا صدّقنا افتراءات القذافي على أجدادنا أنهم لم يفعلوا هذا قط. و بهذا يصبح القذافي رسول الصحراء و رمز العروبة و الشهامة وهو أدرى بهذه الأمور؟ و إيّانا و الاستفادة من المجتمع الدولي فهي خيانة في سجل القذافي، في حين جلبه للمرتزقة الاجانب من دول مسلمة جائز ومن حقه على شعبه المنبوذ. و هنا علينا أن لا ننسى تعاليم العقيد الدينيه؛ فالغرب بمن فيه كافر رغم المساجد المبنية و جماهيريته هادمة المساجد رغم الأصول الصهيونيّة تظل كالفاتح أبداً إسلاميّة.؟
علينا التحرر من هذه القبضة الإبتزازية التجهيلية، فكيف للمعركة أن تُحسم و أذرع اليبيون ملتويّة؟ ولتكن ليبيا الحرة منبراً للبشرية تجادل بالتي هي أحسن على الساحة الدولية، تتعامل بالمثل لا بالتوجّس ولا بالعنجهية. تتسمّى بالإصلاح لا بالإرهابية، با لمساواة بين الخلق لا بالقبلية ولا العنصرية، أمرنا شورى بيننا عدالة و ديمقراطيّة. إنما الأمم الأخلاق، فما حذونا من بقيّة الإنسانية؟
رحم الله الشهداء الأبرار و عاشت ليبيا حره

RE: Libyan Rebels Are Selling Libyan Oil... "Awwww…isn't that sweet !?"

by Enes Senussi on Thursday, 07 April 2011 at 22:18

I've read far too many articles in recent weeks that seem to miss the point about what's happening in Libya. As frustrating and depressing as it has been, I've still catalogued many of these articles and I intend to respond to each and every one in due course. However, I read a brief snippet of "academic" commentary earlier today and I couldn't hold back any longer. The commentary read as follows:

Libyan Rebels Are Selling Libyan Oil... "Awwww…isn't that sweet !?"

The latest news is that Libyan rebels who are in control of oil-producing regions in eastern Libya are now in the process of selling Libyan oil to western states. A huge oil-tanker has docked and is due to be loaded up with oil over the next couple of days. Its all being made possible with the connivance of Qatar and the western states who have been involved in the recent militaristic intervention (the so-called no-fly exercise).

Hmmm…I never realised that Qatar was so concerned about human rights. In which case, I wonder why we never hear Qatar comment on the Palestinian issue? Amazing, is’nt it? Only two or three weeks ago, we were informed by the BBC, Sky news, Fox news, CNN … and the rest - that Gadaffi was “slaughtering his own people” left, right and centre.

Now, almost miraculously, these same down-trodden (slaughtered) masses are selling Libya’s oil. What a speedy recovery from the Gadaffi onslaught we heard so much about!!! Now they have recovered sufficiently to sell Libya’s oil to western states. There is even talk that the EU is negotiating some sort of deal with the (recently-downtrodden-Gadaffi-slaughtered-oil-selling) Libyan rebels.

Awwww…is’nt that sweet !?....

My below response to this commentary unavoidably extended to cover many of the questionable notions implied in other similarly misinformed articles published in light of Libya's crisis.

RE: Libyan Rebels Are Selling Libyan Oil... "Awwww…isn't that sweet !?"

Labelling the Libyan population as “rebels” could imply the legitimisation of Gaddafi’s regime, which came to power by means of an illegal coup almost 42 years ago. It is debatable how such opinions have suddenly sprung, as though at the beckoning call of Gaddafi, to defend his criminal regime at the mere sign of any minute development, albeit economic, pursued by the Libyan people. Frequent and arguably deliberate use of the terms “rebel held Eastern Libya” and “Western Gaddafi stronghold” are at best akin to the revival of North England’s War of the Roses and the territorial allegiances it once encroached as a backdrop to contemporary community tensions in modern day Britain. In other words, these terms bear no truthful or relevant reflection of what has been happening in Libya since mid February 2011.

Oil is without a shadow of a doubt the main component on which the International Community took its unprecedentedly fast action through UN Security Council resolutions 1970 and 1973. Libya’s geographic location also played a role in triggering this comparatively rapid response. Indiscriminate taking of life is probably the least of the world’s worries. After all, so many other populations have been doomed to injustice and have suffered atrocities for decades upon end so why should the Libyan population be any different? If Gaddafi wishes to raise Libya to the ground then the world should accept that, perhaps condemn it, but not intervene. Libya is Gaddafi’s country and the country’s (his) sovereignty must be respected. Colonel Gaddafi, his family and their worshipers represent approximately 5% of the Libyan population. They have ruled the nation with brute force and the world has been happy to do business with them, educate them, speak highly of them and let’s not forget arm them and train them militarily. Four decades of grave human rights violations, crimes against humanity and terrorist affiliation can all be forgiven and forgotten because Gaddafi has the oil and all of the country’s assets in the palm of his hand. Hundreds of millions raked into Gaddafi’s accounts and no one seems to have a problem with that. Perhaps because the world is at ease with Gaddafi and Libya being inseparable, are they not? European and American Corporations marketed Gaddafi’s oil and no fingers were pointed. Qatar volunteers to assist the Interim Transitional National Council (ITNC), the sole representative of the Libyan people, to market two stranded shipments of crude oil to generate desperately needed income in the absence of what have conveniently become Gaddafi’s frozen assets, and the “rebels” are accused of profiteering from the plight of the Libyan people? Supposedly, the same Libyan people that allegedly lived happily in Gaddafi’s Libya; pampered by its oil revenue?

Fear not over Gaddafi’s income, the “rebels’” cunning plot has died in its wake. Gaddafi’s rockets have destroyed major pipe lines in the east of the country since the agreement was with Qatar was reached. Yes, Gaddafi’s firepower has continued to destroy Libya, its people and its resources, unhindered by the safeguards provided by the Security Council’s resolution. Perhaps the protection of the people’s livelihoods does not amount to the protection of their lives. The International Community could claim to have spared parts of the Libyan population from Gaddafi’s onslaught but recognising the ITNC, and allowing it to generate income, would be a step too far. It could prevent people from starving and injured victims from healing, things that Gaddafi’s Authorities are inherently better entrusted to do. Just imagine the risks posed by the “eastern rebels” gaining access to Gaddafi’s Libya’s money! They could arm the Libyan National Army and defend themselves against Gaddafi’s private militias. That would be wrong, because we have until recently armed Gaddafi’s private militias to the teeth on the basis that they are Libya’s National Army. We have seen them systematically murder their own civilian population, the very people they should protect but we must still convince ourselves that they somehow had the right to do so. After all, Gaddafi’s safety and stability has worked for us in the past so why should the safety of the civilians in his country be of any concern now? It’s not like he hasn’t murdered his opponents in the thousands in the past. Should tens of thousands of deaths and disappearances and hundreds of thousands of displacements inflicted with the very arms that we sold to Gaddafi, and happily cashed in from his oil revenues, really be a reason for us to intervene? Isn’t it just another internal affair that is no different to those of other countries? We cannot be seen to be taking sides and acting by hypocritical standards. Perhaps there’s room for diplomacy because no one really wants a stalemate, do they?

The down trodden masses have been so since 1969. God forbid they recover anytime soon. The International Community has learnt a lot from its mistakes in other countries. The fact that the components of these other countries’ conflicts bear no credible resemblance to what is actually happening in Libya is irrelevant. Why should the world want to know what is really happening in Libya? Today’s world only just got its head around Gaddafi. He was a bad guy then a good guy, even by Nelson Mandela’s standards and who can argue with that? Even talk of “pre-Gaddafi” Libya adds insult to injury. It was the short lived post independence Libya yet he still gets his name attached to that. “Ever the showman”, Libya’s money, which is rightfully his, remains clearly still at his disposal. Any international intervention can only mean that the greedy west and the sell-out unpatriotic agents of the west is not in response to Gaddafi’s oppression but a plot to take over his oil, as thought the west weren’t already dealing in his oil for him. Some have gone as far as branding Libyan opposition figures as darlings of the west, talking on TV, living in luxury in Europe and the US, as unworthy of taking part in the debate since they aren’t the ones being bombed by the coalition and are therefore mere opportunists jumping on the bandwagon. But what of the world’s fear of the vacuum that will follow Gaddafi’s speculative departure. We will inevitably be left with someone or something even worse? Al-Qaeda, Islamist Fanatics, an Islamic State, another Iraq, another Somalia, another Afghanistan, another Congo, another Sierra Leone… but not a democratic, civil, constitutional Libyan Republic, perhaps have as stable as the nation once was as a monarchy between 1951 and 1969. No, for some reason, Libyans can’t be trusted without Gaddafi. Surely, the Libyan youths that took rafts of anti aircraft rounds in their heads and chests were far too ambitious.

No, Libyans that speak out against Gaddafi now are either part of America’s plot that’s been in the pipeline for many years. Yes, some of them have even lived in the US since the 1970s! Coincidence? We think not. See, we have evidence that Libya is another Plot! Others are overnight opportunists who couldn’t care less about Libya. Trust us; we are experts on the “Arab” World. We’ve published many studies on “Iran”!? Why should Libya’s opposition be any different to that of other countries? The world insists that matters can only get worse while insisting on preserving Gaddafi even if by merely not completely denouncing his mob as the terrorist organisation that it is and responding to the will of the Libyan people by recognising its ITNC as the legitimate political authority of Libya; note, not Gaddafi’s Libya. His never had a government or constitution.We, the International Community, are swayed by public opinion. We don’t know better than to reluctantly fulfil our legal obligations towards a member state of the UN without living up to the PR aspirations of the better connected side. Why should it be portrayed as a struggle of 95% of a population against a despot family, when terms like “civil war”, “armed conflict”, “cease fire” and “civilian casualties” can be exploited? Gaddafi’s version of events just so happens to be closer to our hearts, given how angry were already are about century long disputes between Arab and Jew, Sunni and Shia, Imperialist and Nationalist, etc. It is not like Libya’s opposition figures have been tortured, executed, assassinated and forced into exile. They are at ease living as strangers in strange lands thousands of miles away from their families and friends, missing bereavements and celebrations decades upon end.

Medical procedures often fail leaving patents with side effects, irrecoverable conditions or even death. Somehow these very procedures are not prevented from being carried out on other patients albeit by different surgeons and in different hospitals. The subjective components that unavoidably determine the success or failure of any given procedure seem to have been stripped from existence in Libya’s current crisis. The Libyan population is being kicked on the ground with streams of salt poured into its wounds because of a global template of misfortune that other populations have endured. The best that some have had to say, to avoid being misunderstood, is that they don’t think Gaddafi is great but that why should he be suddenly defeated allowing the contrast of previous outcomes of conflicts to appear more damning than they are already. Libya’s people are not to blame for the shortfalls of the International Community, its legal and political infrastructures, nor for the destructive acts of elements ensued within other societies around the world; present or past. To this accord, the cause of the Libyan people should not be undermined by pointless speculation over the emergence of any parallels in political or legal paradigms inherent from different places, peoples and times. Such opinions could be viable within the confines of the minds in which they are thought out. Indeed these opinions could even receive admiration from semi-cult followers of various schools of thought.

The Libyan people has been held hostage for almost 42 years. The majority of debate surrounding its plight is either written at the expense of Gaddafi’s PR machine or by individuals stuck in an engraved pattern of perception. The majority of the Libyan people have no idea that such debate is talking place and that such opinions are being formed. What matters most to the Libyan people now is that an unfathomable barrier of fear is broken. It therefore seems ill-informed of anyone to openly smear the Libyan people’s achievements thus far in trying to establish a civil society as dubious attempts to enrich “rebels” or collaborative Western states. The hesitant sympathy expressed by the term “Awwww” comes as quite a shock considering the extent of horrific losses suffered by the Libyan people at the hands of Gaddafi’s regime; safe in the knowledge that Gaddafi’s oil revenue funded the very genocide of the Libyan people. Use of this term to mock the Libyan people’s attempt to maintain some stability is an unforgivable bias to Gaddafi’s regime. Even if the ITNC invested in arming the Libyan National Army, its objective is to protect the civilian population against ongoing attacks by Gaddafi’s ruthless militias unlike Gaddafi’s objective which some how wasn’t deserving of such appalling criticism. Libyans are selling Libyan oil and, no, it isn’t sweet in the slightest.

"Rebels" walk past a burning Al-Sedr Oil Terminal after it was hit by pro-Gaddafi forces during clashes between Ras Lanuf and Bin Jawad March 9.(Reuters)

Not an Eastern City in Sight and All We Want is the Same

by Enes Senussi on Thursday, 07 April 2011 at 01:14

I had to show my ID to a postman today while collecting a parcel. “Libya” is stated on my driving licence, which prompted the postman to ask which side of the Libyan conflict I was on, east or west? A university professor posed the same question to me last week. It baffles me how Gaddafi’s propaganda and seemingly untarnished PR machine has been able to convince such a broad spectrum of spectators that Libya’s crisis is a civil war between east and west and not a struggle between 95% of the population against Colonel Gaddafi’s family, its worshipers and its private armed militias.

Here’s a list of videos from western cities in Libya that aims to reassert the face of the popular uprising in western cities, which took place simultaneously to those in the east, to counter the regime’s claim that it is no more than an armed insurgency in the east and that everyone in the west loves Gaddafi! I hope that in the grand scheme of things the videos short listed here will help the seemingly misled public opinion realise the truth of how the uprising took place all across the nation and not just the east. Unfortunately, the presence of most of Gaddafi’s fire power in the west made it possible for him to retaliate with such brutal force while telling the world that the east is rebelling! The video’s will demonstrate why Az-Zawia, Misurata and many other western cities have been and continue to be punished with no remorse from Gaddafi’s forces.

The repeated reference to Benghazi as the “rebel capital in the east” is extremely damning. Those branded “rebels” are the overwhelming majority of the Libyan population, which hails from every stretch of the country, and their only capital is TRIPOLI.

The same imminent protection provided to the Libyan population in Benghazi, by UN Security Council Resolution 1973, is equally necessitated in western and southern cities and towns many of which are featured in these videos. The continued disregard of the threat posed on these cities has inevitably allowed Gaddafi’s forces to escalate their offensives and exert their imposed authority over these cities; falsely portraying the alleged east / west divide. The regime is now thought to have been inadvertently permitted by the International Community to establish a fabricated bargaining stake, on the political front, whereby maintaining its divisive and brutal control throughout the west and parts of the south of the country it can contend diplomatic means to settle its dispute with so called “rebels” in the east.

The events in these videos sporadically took place during a period of over one month between mid Feb and late March 2011 (VERY RECENTLY). Somehow many people across the world became alert of Libya’s crisis in the manner that Gaddafi intended; a territorial civil war between two armed factions, government vs. “rebels”, which simply isn’t true.

Details of specific dates and locations are contained in each of the respective videos. Some highlights have been entered in brackets aside certain links as a brief overview.

WARNING: the following list of Libyan cities does not include any from the east of the country!!!

1) [In the begining... (18-19 Feb)]
2) [more from “green square” at the very start]
4) [Commentary includes renaming the former “Green Square” as “Benghazi Square”]
5) [Mohamed Migaryaf Street and Algeria Square]
6) [An-Nasr Street, 25 March 2011]
16) [chant: Tajura don’t be afraid anymore, your brothers have died in Benghazi]
17) [chant :To hell with Gaddafi, O’ Tajura don’t be afraid anymore]

3) [mass burning of Gaddafi’s green book]
4) [among the chants: “Youth of Sirte, do as the Misurata youth have done”]
6) [very powerful chants during mass funeral ceremony]
12) [in solidarity with Az-Zawia]
13) [10,000 + march following first funerals in the city]
14) [Extremely horrifying and moving, Illustrates sheer brutality of affairs and the people’s determination despite their hardship]




2) [in solidarity with Az-Zawia]

1) [a rare sight of its short lived liberation]
3) [very moving chant: “Benghazi you’re not on your own, Zawia will heal your wounds”]

1) [“with our souls with our blood, we will sacrifice for you Benghazi”]
2) [wrecking of Gaddafi’s Internal Security office block.]

3) [banners read: Libyans are one tribe. Chants say: hand in hand, Gaddafi will not scare us]

1) [various pro-democracy and anti-Gaddafi chants]

1) [this is a collective of video. It contains plenty of authentic footage beyond the initial into. Chants include Freedom, Freedom, we don’t want the five hundred dinars, and, anyone who accepts the five hundred has no sense of patriotism. Some chants are in Tamazight not even Arabic.]