23-03-2011, 07:12 AM
(This post was last modified: 23-03-2011, 07:25 AM by Magda Hassan.)
The whole thing is such BS. We've seen it all before with the Kuwaiti babies thrown out of their incubators by Saddam Hussein's mad military and the dastardly Huns bayoneting Belgian babies.
The whole reason for the No Fly Zone was to stop the 'mad man' Gaddafi from bombing his own people. However, such an even has never happened. We now have to get our news about reality from Russia, what an irony, and the Russians say that there was no aerial bombardment of any part of Libya by Gaddafi or any other forces. They know this because of their satellites. They want this information known because they are against the NFZ.
If Gaddafi had really bombed his own people don't you think by now that we would have been bombarded on our own media screens with these images? But the tv screens screen this information out of the picture. Why? They don't exist because it never happened. It isn't on the western media because the media can't get hold of the commercial satellite images because it is not available. The US military have bought exclusive access to the images just like they did in Iraq and Afghanistan and now Libya. These images were not even brought to the UN to justify the NFZ. Even Colin Powell came up with a couple of ice cream trucks in the desert to justify the Iraqi WMDs.
At the time of the so called air attacks by Gaddafi's air force against civilians there were no foreign journalists in the country. They were conveniently covering the events in Tunisia and Egypt. The internet and Twitter and Facebook were blocked. So how did the information get out? The use of unsourced informants has been unusually widespread in promoting all sorts of allegations against Gaddafi. Second and third hand anonymous accounts. This sort of nonsense would normally never see the light of day in any newsroom. While not including Faux Ewes the rest of the media still cling to some sort of credibility and it seems unlikely they would be publishing and broadcasting unchecked sources. If the journalist themselves were not there to check they must be relying on some other 'trusted' source to verify the information. But these source don't want to be mentioned. It is almost certain that those unmentioned sources would have been people from the foreign policy and defense establishments of the U.S. and European countries, most likely foreign intelligence agency operatives functioning under diplomatic cover. These stories just wouldn't have gotten out without extra official Western help. We all know there were British SAS there. Who else was there?
Also when you do any research about the 'rebels' the Libyan Human Rights League keeps coming up. I'd like to more about them and who funds them etc.
More tail wagging the dog here:
The whole reason for the No Fly Zone was to stop the 'mad man' Gaddafi from bombing his own people. However, such an even has never happened. We now have to get our news about reality from Russia, what an irony, and the Russians say that there was no aerial bombardment of any part of Libya by Gaddafi or any other forces. They know this because of their satellites. They want this information known because they are against the NFZ.
If Gaddafi had really bombed his own people don't you think by now that we would have been bombarded on our own media screens with these images? But the tv screens screen this information out of the picture. Why? They don't exist because it never happened. It isn't on the western media because the media can't get hold of the commercial satellite images because it is not available. The US military have bought exclusive access to the images just like they did in Iraq and Afghanistan and now Libya. These images were not even brought to the UN to justify the NFZ. Even Colin Powell came up with a couple of ice cream trucks in the desert to justify the Iraqi WMDs.
At the time of the so called air attacks by Gaddafi's air force against civilians there were no foreign journalists in the country. They were conveniently covering the events in Tunisia and Egypt. The internet and Twitter and Facebook were blocked. So how did the information get out? The use of unsourced informants has been unusually widespread in promoting all sorts of allegations against Gaddafi. Second and third hand anonymous accounts. This sort of nonsense would normally never see the light of day in any newsroom. While not including Faux Ewes the rest of the media still cling to some sort of credibility and it seems unlikely they would be publishing and broadcasting unchecked sources. If the journalist themselves were not there to check they must be relying on some other 'trusted' source to verify the information. But these source don't want to be mentioned. It is almost certain that those unmentioned sources would have been people from the foreign policy and defense establishments of the U.S. and European countries, most likely foreign intelligence agency operatives functioning under diplomatic cover. These stories just wouldn't have gotten out without extra official Western help. We all know there were British SAS there. Who else was there?
Also when you do any research about the 'rebels' the Libyan Human Rights League keeps coming up. I'd like to more about them and who funds them etc.
More tail wagging the dog here:
"The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it." Karl Marx
"He would, wouldn't he?" Mandy Rice-Davies. When asked in court whether she knew that Lord Astor had denied having sex with her.
“I think it would be a good idea” Ghandi, when asked about Western Civilisation.
"He would, wouldn't he?" Mandy Rice-Davies. When asked in court whether she knew that Lord Astor had denied having sex with her.
“I think it would be a good idea” Ghandi, when asked about Western Civilisation.