They've always wanted to go in and get Libya's oil so they had to paint him as a villain so they'd have a story to tell the American people. I live in Europe and I speak to Africans here. They've always said that the Libyan people don't hate Gaddafi. He saved Libya from being a colony when he took power in a coup and the oil money was then used for the good of the Libyan people instead of being stolen by western capitalists. This article and video explain it. http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Global_Secrets_Lies/Qaddafi_NWO.html http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=trhcKP53r4U Be sure to read the comment section of that YouTube video. According to these two videos, Gaddafi was using the oil money for the benefit of the libyan people http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dYjgh5243eg http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MdFh-x6LOZY Just exactly who those rebels were is not clear. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xeKcuHKLNps In every country there's always at least one small group that's against the government. Gaddafi was supposed to be a progressive Moslem that believed in women's rights, etc. That would have angered fundamentalist Moslems. The CIA might have found such a group, armed them, and sent in mercenaries to increase their numbers and make it look more legitimate. Those rebels would have gotten nowhere without the help of NATO. I've just scanned this work of Gaddafi's but the little I read doesn't look like the work of a mental pervert. http://911-truth.net/other-books/Muammar-Qaddafi-Green-Book-Eng.pdf Why would the people be against someone like this. Do searches on Libya in these two sites to get some objective articles. http://www.globalresearch.ca/ http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/ The American media give an upside down version of the world situation. http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=145531 The US is considered the "Bad guys" in the third world. If Gaddafi can be connected to any violence, it was part of the struggle for the independence of the third world. This looks like the classic case of a nationalist throwing out the imperial powers that were robbing his country and using the once-stolen resources for the benefit of the people. The American press duly slanders him to make him look like the villain to prepare the people for an eventual intervention to get back the resources they once had. To me Gaddafi seems like Africa's Che Guevara.
I find all of this hard to believe. After all he did make a lot of money off of selling arms on the black market. Don't give me the stuff about the United States. I am aware of that, so if you use it against Americans I can use it against you. I of course don't trust the federal government of my own nation either. But my biggest question is this: Wasn't he a dictator? Did he not give his people equality in poverty? I mean Napoleon did the same thing.
I suspect a fair bit of what he's posted is biased and conspiracy-mongering, but not all of it. I read some of the first article he posted a link to, and it became clear it wasn't written objectively; among other things, it seemed to be praising Col. Gaddafi for supporting "liberation organisations" like the IRA! Um. We're talking about an organisation who was causing far more trouble for the people they claimed they represented than anyone outside Ireland was; unemployment was high because companies simply didn't want to invest in a place where any factories and offices they set up might be bombed! And the IRA were perfectly willing to kill civilians. What exactly did they imagine they were liberating them from, I wonder! But there might still be accurate information in those articles. A knee-jerk reaction to reject anything that criticises America won't do any good. I don't know enough about it to judge, but I've just come across something doing my own search that says literacy levels in Libya are higher than almost every other African country and education for people under 15 is compulsory. I've heard Col. Gaddafi was cruel and opponents of his regime were tortured. But maybe he did introduce a lot of good reforms that helped a lot of people. If so, it's depressing that they didn't give a thought to that before deciding to get rid of him in favour of an unknown quantity; who knows whether the government running Libya in a year's time will be a compassionate one or an Islamist Al Qaeda-haven that cares nothing for things like education and progress.
Pam Am Flight 103 On 22 February 2011 during the 2011 Libyan civil war, the ex Minister of Justice Mustafa Abdul Jalil stated in an interview with the Swedish newspaper Expressen that Muammar Gaddafi had personally ordered the bombing. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pan_Am_Flight_103
Oil's well that owns an oil well. There is no point in overthrowing a dictator for free. Would you risk your life to overthrow a dictator, then walk away so that the next one can take his place? Claiming the US is after oil only is like suggesting that they were really only interested in invading germany because they had a shortage of sauerkraut in the US at the time. He of the trendy dictatorship had zero good points. His attempt to make himself head of a unified africa says everything. Egotist military dictator to the core. Its just a wonder he stayed in power so long.
