Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
1Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Humiliation and Death as a National Policy

Humiliation and Death as a National Policy

Ratings: (0)|Views: 7|Likes:
Published by Michael Collins
NATO totally demolished the Libyan city of Sirte over the past six weeks. Why? Because it's Gaddafi's home town and it wouldn't surrender to the al-Qaeda aligned commanders of the Libyan rebels. The rebels can't win without NATO and NATO can't win with out a massive slaughter. It is utterly barbaric. Obama should be ashamed. Don't hold your breath.
NATO totally demolished the Libyan city of Sirte over the past six weeks. Why? Because it's Gaddafi's home town and it wouldn't surrender to the al-Qaeda aligned commanders of the Libyan rebels. The rebels can't win without NATO and NATO can't win with out a massive slaughter. It is utterly barbaric. Obama should be ashamed. Don't hold your breath.

More info:

Published by: Michael Collins on Oct 23, 2011
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

04/29/2012

pdf

text

original

 
Humiliation and Death as a Tool of National Policy
By Michael Collins
"It’s not acceptable to kill a person without trying him," said Louay
 Hussein, a Syrian opposition figure in Damascus. "I prefer to see thetyrant behind bars."  New York Times, October 20
 The New York Times reported that a NATO jet and drones disabled vehicles in a convoy carrying Muammar Gaddafi near the besieged town of Sirte on October 20.Loyalists in the remaining vehicles scattered becoming easy prey for the emboldened fighters of the new Libyan state.Reuters expanded the narrative on the 21st by reporting that Gaddafi fled from his jeep, hid in a drainage pipe, and emerged with an automatic weapon and side arm. He was manhandled andslapped by the soldiers of the new Libya. He allegedly asked the crowd, "Don't you know rightfrom wrong?" They took exception to the question and shot him twice in the head. He wastransported to Misurata, scene of one of the few decisive victories by the former rebels. Gaddafi'scorpse was placed on a bare mattress and put on display for the public on the 22nd. It remainsthere today, although it is now reportedly covered by a blanket(Reuters, October 23). There's a new sheriff in town, NATO.Left, Gaddafi captured and alive - center, shot in the head - right, the
official
death shotFrom Youtube.com: video / video images carried by the New York Times, BBC and al Jazeera.
 
On one level, the truth of this story matters a great deal. On another level, accuracy is not asimportant as the clear message to those who oppose United States, French, and British policyexecuted by NATO. Those who resist will be publicly humiliated in the most primitive way andthen killed. The composite story indicates intent and intent reveals policy.
It's not just leaders who will be punished
 
"You have won your revolution. And now, we will be a partner as you forge a future that  provides dignity, freedom and opportunity." President Barack Obama, White House, October 20,2011
 The citizens of Gaddafi's home town, Sirte,were said to be special beneficiaries of the ruler's largesse. The Mediterranean port was prosperous and productive amidst the strangeness andstrictures of his arbitrary rule. Were citizens supposed to object on moral grounds because theirbenefactor favored them? What risk would they have incurred by doing so, even if they wantedto turn away special favors? They had no choice but they got the message from NATO. It's yourturn to die.From Sirte, Libya: "Not one building is intact. Windows are shattered. Shops are shuttered andthe city's 120,000 residents are nowhere to be seen." Mark Bastian, AFP, October 23 (Image: Libyan Free Press) Hadn't they heard the pronouncements from the United States,Great Britain, and France that Gaddafi was reformed and a member in good standing of the world community? Perhaps theymissed President Barack Obama's announced change in that assessment.When the Libyan rebels and their NATO allies prevailed over Gaddafi's forces, Sirte stood as themost prominent holdout against the government that denies that it is, in fact, a government, theNational Transition Council (NTC). The citizens of Sirte didn't attack any other city. Theysimply lived there.
 
In early September, the top commander of the RTC announced that Sirte would be taken by forceif the town failed to surrender. There were pro Gaddafi forces in the city. But city officials,separate from those forces, tried to negotiate a peaceful end to the threatened siege. Unfortunately, the residents and their representatives lacked the power to do the one thing thatwas needed to save their lives, surrender Gaddafi. For this, the town was demolished by NATO bombings and many were injured or killed.
Civilization in the balance
 The statement by Syrian opposition activist, Louay Hussein,supporting due process of law and basic human rights stands in stark contrast to the entirety of President Obama's statement on thesame day Gaddafi was murdered. Louvay's long time opposition to violence as a means of change is not at all apparent by Obama's behavior as a leader. Obama increased fighting inAfghanistan along with troops. Libya is the Nobel Peace Prize winner's second major descentinto violence, this time through the NATO proxy. In his October 20 statement from the WhiteHouse, Obama said:"So this is a momentous day in the history of Libya. The dark shadow of tyranny has been lifted.And with this enormous promise, the Libyan people now have a great responsibility -- to buildan inclusive and tolerant and democratic Libya that
stands as the ultimate rebuke to Qaddafi’s
dictatorship." President Barack Obama, October 20  Obama pairs lifting the "dark shadow of tyranny" with the death of Gaddafi and then lectures theLibyan people about inclusivity and tolerance. What an odd world view this is. Libyan cities arein ruin, thousands are dead, many more injured, and the city where
the dark shadow
was lifted isdevastated. Is it
tolerant 
to blow a people and city to bits because they won't surrender? Is it
inclusive
to kill off citizens simply because they're in the former leader's hometown?Who would fail to get the message? When the president says your time is up, you're in serioustrouble. Gaddafi and Saddam Hussein were both cooperative members of the U.S.-NATO teamat different points in their careers. Yet both Iraq and Libya were attacked, their populationravaged, and, after the destruction of people and infrastructure, the leaders were captured andkilled.Where will it end?When will someone in leadership stand up and say that behaving in a brutish, violent, anduncivilized fashion is immoral, repulsive, and unacceptable. Representatives Ron Paul (R-TX)and Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) have said just that, as have others.They're ignored by their political peers and ridiculed by the corporate media. There is a deafening silence among those inthe power structure and their patrons. They miss this simple point. This is not about who Gaddafiis. It's about who we are and how our good name is hijacked by leaders who order violencewithout any restraint.For decades, the strength and humanity of the nation has been siphoned off to support theseoverseas adventures concocted by presidents of limited vision and intellect, bereft of any

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->