I have no doubt in my mind Libya is going to be worse under the Al Qaeda rebel leaders. They're sell outs willing to give themselves to foreigners...and its the same story in the US. Our politicians sell out our people when they purposefully create tax breaks to ship jobs overseas to get corporate lobbying monies. Traitors are amongst us, and the rebel leaders are GRADE A traitors..
Since no moderator is evidently keeping any of you people in check, I'll speak on behalf of my two dead cuisins who died fighting Ghadaffi
Fuck you.
whoa dude! just coz someone has view that differs from the view we are fed in the mainstream media does NOT give you the right to swear at them. if i had a report button i'd sure be using it right now...
Hmm... So he's fed the news of his cousins deaths through mainstream media? This thread isn't filled with "alternative news", it's filled with conspiracy theories. There can also be only one truth and while the mainstream media may not always give a 100% accurate account it sure as hell is a lot more accurate than all the crap that's been coming out of RT in this thread. Not to mention all of the subjective journalist sources being linked to on various off-sites. Whenever you bake in your own (or your company's) opinion as fact as a journalist you're distorting reality. I'm not kidding when I say that I open this thread each day and shake my head in disbelief.
Subjective journalism you claim. Are you therefore saying that Main stream media is reporting these events objectively?
What are these conspiracy theories you are talking about, how about you start clarifying what they are?
What have they done to be "subjective journalism" What evidence do you have aside from your opinion.
You also clearly ignore the links about the news reports of CNN saying NATO and Qatari forces were training the rebels while at the same time NATO has said they had no boots on the ground, or the one with congressman Dennis Kucinich).
It is as Orwell said it 1984: Never at war with EastAsia always at war with East Asia.
* news
CIA recruits 1,500 from Mazar-e-Sharif to fight in Libya By: Azhar Masood | Published: August 31, 2011
ISLAMABAD – The Central Intelligence Agency of the United States recruited over 1,500 men from Mazar-e-Sharif for fighting against the Qaddafi forces in Libya.
Sources told TheNation: “Most of the men have been recruited from Afghanistan. They are Uzbeks, Persians and Hazaras. According to the footage, these men attired in Uzbek-style of shalwar and Hazara-Uzbek Kurta were found fighting in Libyan cities.”
When Al-Jazeera reporter pointed it he was disallowed by the ‘rebels ‘to capture images. Sources in Quetta said: “Some Uzbeks and Hazaras from Afghanistan were arrested in Balochistan for illegally traveling into Pakistan en route to Libya through Iran. Aljazeera’s report gave credence to this story. More than 60 Afghans, mainly children and teenagers, have been found dead after suffocating inside a shipping container in southwestern Pakistan in an apparent human smuggling attempt.
More than 100 illegal immigrants were discovered 20km from the border town of Quetta last week inside the container, which had been locked from the outside. Aljazeera having dubious record gave human touch to this story as most of the men who intruded inside Pakistan from Afghanistan were recruits for Libyan Rebels’ Force.
More news China blocks Europe moves to free money for Libya: envoys United Nations, Aug 30 (AFP)
China has held up moves by Britain, France and Germany to get a UN sanctions committee to release five billion dollars of frozen Libyan assets to buy emergency aid, diplomats have said.
The United States had to threaten to seek a full UN Security Council resolution last week to get South Africa to end its hold on the release of 1.5 billion dollars in frozen Libyan regime assets.
This time China's UN mission is seeking authority from the Beijing government before approving the bid by the European nations to get humanitarian aid to Libya. Britain wanted to release about one billion pounds (USD 1.6 billion) of Libyan currency printed by a British firm, British officials said.
Germany has asked the sanctions committee to "to authorise the release of up to one billion euros from assets of the Libyan Central Bank frozen in Germany," said a spokesman for the German UN mission.
"It is our objective to make these funds available to the Libyan people, as soon as possible, in particular for humanitarian assistance," the spokesman added.
Why? You guys are spouting BULLSHIT since i don't know how many pages totally resistant to anything even remotely "proven" or "facutal". It's like your digging up sources that claim diffrent stuff just for the sake of it.
I would feel insulted as hell if I would be involved into this somehow..
Oh btw: There also were no riots in London, it was all a big conspiracy by the Greeks to bring the european union down so they can default. The sad thing is, some of you people probably believe this.
On August 31 2011 22:49 Velr wrote: Why? You guys are spouting BULLSHIT since i don't know how many pages totally resistant to anything even remotely "proven" or "facutal". It's like your digging up sources that claim diffrent stuff just for the sake of it.
I would feel insulted as hell if I would be involved into this somehow..
Oh btw: There also were no riots in London, it was all a big conspiracy by the Greeks to bring the european union down so they can default. The sad thing is, some of you people probably believe this.
Well if you are so sure people are spouting "BULLSHIT " why don't you try and discredit our sources with factual proof?
It should be a peace of cake right if its that obvious!
I could post a picture right from Lybia/Tripolis at a central place that shows people celebrating or wtf ever and one of you morons would say that this picture was made in some studio in Qatar...
Seriously, read what kind of stuff Geyzer and others have postet here.
Because its impossible to prove something to someone who does not accept any sources at all. You would basically have to grab them and fly them over, and probably even then they would claim that they don't know that they have flown to lybia and could be in some faked city full of actors.
To have an actually useful debate where you can prove something you need to have some common ground as a starting point. Basically, if you are convinced that there is a gigantic conspiracy noone can prove to you that there isn't, because every proof would obviously be part of that giant conspiracy. This is why in science a theory needs to be falsifiable to make any sense.
"NATO’s peaceful and sustainable political solution: turn Tripoli into a slaughterhouse" Man, that seems like an informative, non subjective headline, wouldn't you say? The actual articles on humanrightsinvestigation goes from baseless suggestions to fullblown fabrication of facts. Pulling things out of context out of legit new sources and twisting them to something else isn't hard to do. If you really want to see something you'll see it. Things like "The apparent fall of Tawergha was also reported by Orla Guerin of the BBC who also, disgracefully, failed to give the ethnic cleansing context despite actually interviewing Ibrahim al-Halbous, the very commander of whom the Wall Street Journal reported:
Ibrahim al-Halbous, a rebel commander leading the fight near Tawergha, says all remaining residents should leave once if his fighters capture the town. “They should pack up,” Mr. Halbous said. “Tawergha no longer exists, only Misrata.”"
That's great, except that the qoute they pulled has absolutely nothing to do with ethnic cleansing. In fact, it doesn't even tell us why Mr. Halbous wants the people to leave. In either case, note the words pack up rather than a word like execute or exterminate.
Every single article is full with speculation. Very few things are established as actual facts with reputeable sources. Basically what seems to end up happening is that they pull a real source of a real event and then add supposed extra things that happened but were never investigated - as if they had their own third person reporter on scene. Except they never did, they're just pulling shit out of their ass.
Now, your other website links to things like this wonderful article: http://www.thenewamerican.com/world-mainmenu-26/africa-mainmenu-27/8795-al-qaeda-and-natos-islamic-extremists-taking-over-libya I'd like you to note how, similar to what I said above, several things are baselessly asserted and addressed as fact. In this particular article I'd like to address the redicolousness of the US and NATO wilfully funding Al Qaida. I'm not sure if you've been sleeping the last 10 or so years but the US in particular has been waging active war with "terrorists" all around the globe, and first and foremost of all these terrorist organisations they're fighting is Al Qaida. I'm sure there really are a few Al Qaida fighters among the rebels (I mean they get real battlefield action there and feel useful so why not) but to claim that most or all of the rebels are Al Qaida or that Al Qaida is being actively funded to overthrow Gaddafi is beyond retarded. It's so mindnumbingly stupid that I don't even know what to say. Furthermore it is known (remember, reputeable sources) that the CIA started training rebels long ago. Notice that I used the word rebels. This does not equal boots on the ground as there are no US or NATO forces fighting actively in Libya nor is there any evidence that this would be the case. At the same time I would not be surprised if special operations teams were indeed operating in Libya, but again, this happens all the time and is under the radar and, again, does not equal so called boots on the ground. The article is so far separated from reality it's shameful, yet it acts like it's as credible as anything else.
Look, whenever you have an article end on things like "Middle Eastern nations. Islamic extremists, meanwhile, are arming and preparing themselves for more violence as they exploit the situation to gain more power. Analysts say the nightmare is only beginning." you ought to know something is up. What analysts? How did they reach that conclusion? Oh right, there never was one, the article author is pulling things out of his ass.
And then, at the end of it all, there's people like you, who lack the critical eye to see through simple things like this. You attack me when I say that mainstream media is closer to the truth than your subjective journalistic media is by asking me if they're to be trusted blindly. I'd never say such a thing, in fact I specifically said that they're closer to reality and give a more accurate picture than your media does.
Sprinkling in actual facts in an article doesn't make all of it true, remember that.
Anyone who genuinly believes articles like the one I quoted in this post or articles in general from the sites in question should take up a course at a university in source criticism.
I'd like you to note how, similar to what I said above, several things are baselessly asserted and addressed as fact. In this particular article I'd like to address the redicolousness of the US and NATO wilfully funding Al Qaida. I'm not sure if you've been sleeping the last 10 or so years but the US in particular has been waging active war with "terrorists" all around the globe, and first and foremost of all these terrorist organisations they're fighting is Al Qaida. I'm sure there really are a few Al Qaida fighters among the rebels (I mean they get real battlefield action there and feel useful so why not) but to claim that most or all of the rebels are Al Qaida or that Al Qaida is being actively funded to overthrow Gaddafi is beyond retarded. It's so mindnumbingly stupid that I don't even know what to say. Furthermore it is known (remember, reputeable sources) that the CIA started training rebels long ago. Notice that I used the word rebels. This does not equal boots on the ground as there are no US or NATO forces fighting actively in Libya nor is there any evidence that this would be the case. At the same time I would not be surprised if special operations teams were indeed operating in Libya, but again, this happens all the time and is under the radar and, again, does not equal so called boots on the ground. The article is so far separated from reality it's shameful, yet it acts like it's as credible as anything else. .
Get your facts straight bro, USA Funded a rebel group in Afghanistan when the Soviet where there the soviet then left and the rebels USA had helped merged with another rebel group that is Al'qaeda friendly, then that merged group helped Al'qaida USA has never supported Al'qaida in any way they helped a rebel group.
Algeria at risk of al-Qaeda revenge attacks after accepting Gaddafi family
The Gaddafi family's welcome in Algeria could be short-lived as the country faces the prospect of a wave of revenge attacks by al-Qaeda terrorists.
The Algerian leadership initially supported Col Muammar Gaddafi in his fight against the rebels, but their continued backing of the tyrant is likely to become a political liability, experts warned.
Col Gaddafi's wife Safiya, his sons Mohammed and Hannibal, and his daughter Aisha, fled across the Algerian border in an armed convoy on Sunday night, and are now thought to be in the capital, Algiers.
The Libyan rebels have said that harbouring the family members is an "act of aggression" but the Algerians also face opposition from their own population and from al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM), sworn enemies of Gaddafi.
An Algerian Interior Ministry source said they had put 30,000 men on the streets of Algiers alone, including an extra 20,000 police.
By the way, Saji, this Lizzie Phelan you speak so highly of..
She has been confronted with documentary proof of her being on Gaddafi's payroll. If she was unjustly accused, she should have made a big deal of it. Instead what does she do?
Removes all her Youtube rants, twitter and has shut down all her blogs. In an apparent "muzzling by the West", so say you.
Really now, Saji,.. why don't you fly over to Libya and take pictures of Gaddafi's victories?
On August 31 2011 23:51 ImFromPortugal wrote: nato warning ?^^
Algeria at risk of al-Qaeda revenge attacks after accepting Gaddafi family
The Gaddafi family's welcome in Algeria could be short-lived as the country faces the prospect of a wave of revenge attacks by al-Qaeda terrorists.
The Algerian leadership initially supported Col Muammar Gaddafi in his fight against the rebels, but their continued backing of the tyrant is likely to become a political liability, experts warned.
Col Gaddafi's wife Safiya, his sons Mohammed and Hannibal, and his daughter Aisha, fled across the Algerian border in an armed convoy on Sunday night, and are now thought to be in the capital, Algiers.
The Libyan rebels have said that harbouring the family members is an "act of aggression" but the Algerians also face opposition from their own population and from al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM), sworn enemies of Gaddafi.
An Algerian Interior Ministry source said they had put 30,000 men on the streets of Algiers alone, including an extra 20,000 police.
Gaddafi has been against any form of revolutionary group for a long time.. Libyans joined Al Qaeda in the past to gain knowledge of how to fight against his regime and he has cracked down on them before. It is not surprising that they have this goal to seek revenge against Gaddafi.
I'd like you to note how, similar to what I said above, several things are baselessly asserted and addressed as fact. In this particular article I'd like to address the redicolousness of the US and NATO wilfully funding Al Qaida. I'm not sure if you've been sleeping the last 10 or so years but the US in particular has been waging active war with "terrorists" all around the globe, and first and foremost of all these terrorist organisations they're fighting is Al Qaida. I'm sure there really are a few Al Qaida fighters among the rebels (I mean they get real battlefield action there and feel useful so why not) but to claim that most or all of the rebels are Al Qaida or that Al Qaida is being actively funded to overthrow Gaddafi is beyond retarded. It's so mindnumbingly stupid that I don't even know what to say. Furthermore it is known (remember, reputeable sources) that the CIA started training rebels long ago. Notice that I used the word rebels. This does not equal boots on the ground as there are no US or NATO forces fighting actively in Libya nor is there any evidence that this would be the case. At the same time I would not be surprised if special operations teams were indeed operating in Libya, but again, this happens all the time and is under the radar and, again, does not equal so called boots on the ground. The article is so far separated from reality it's shameful, yet it acts like it's as credible as anything else. .
Get your facts straight bro, USA Funded a rebel group in Afghanistan when the Soviet where there the soviet then left and the rebels USA had helped merged with another rebel group that is Al'qaeda friendly, then that merged group helped Al'qaida USA has never supported Al'qaida in any way they helped a rebel group.
How does that have anything to do with what he's talking about? His point is that in the CURRENT situation, the US/NATO is actively fighting AQ and has a vested interest in not helping them. Yes, the US did help fund AQ in the 80's but at that point in time they had the motive of fucking with the USSR, what could possibly be their motive for doing the same thing in 2011?
Algeria always had problems with islamists (AQIM). AQIM does not have much support of Algerian population. It is a big problem to have islamistic Libya with NATO bases by the border and Algerian government understands that early or later they will have their own islamist-west "revolution". There are rumors that Algeria is sending 5000 troops to help Gaddafi as volunteers i.e. not official.
Khamis is alive, lost count how many times he is "officially" dead.
NTC does not have control over rebels, Benghazi or Tripoli. That' why they are on french ship Mistral now.
My guess: it is OK for West and NATO that civil war will continue. They will just guard oil business with NATO troops and PMC. I wounder if al-Qaeda remains NATO ally or eventually ask them out. The rebels cannot hold Libya without western support, all Libyan population has weapons and as soon as NATO is out, the rebels will have hard times. Ordinary al-Qaeda members hate they temporary ally as a normal islamist does, but al-Qaeda leaders understand that support of the West is essential. So i predict some tension inside of al-Qaeda...
Don't you find guys that is weird to say "al-Qaeda remains NATO ally"? . Still cannot get used to it. This fast changing world...
On September 01 2011 00:24 GeyzeR wrote: Algeria always had problems with islamists (AQIM). AQIM does not have much support of Algerian population. It is a big problem to have islamistic Libya with NATO bases by the border and Algerian government understands that early or later they will have their own islamist-west "revolution". There are rumors that Algeria is sending 5000 troops to help Gaddafi as volunteers i.e. not official.
Khamis is alive, lost count how many times he is "officially" dead.
NTC does not have control over rebels, Benghazi or Tripoli. That' why they are on french ship Mistral now.
My guess: it is OK for West and NATO that civil war will continue. They will just guard oil business with NATO troops and PMC. I wounder if al-Qaeda remains NATO ally or eventually ask them out. The rebels cannot hold Libya without western support, all Libyan population has weapons and as soon as NATO is out, the rebels will have hard times. Ordinary al-Qaeda members hate they temporary ally as a normal islamist does, but al-Qaeda leaders understand that support of the West is essential. So i predict some tension inside of al-Qaeda...
Don't you find guys that is weird to say "al-Qaeda remains NATO ally"? . Still cannot get used to it. This fast changing world...
All african countries should send troops to aid Ghaddafi, enough is enough.
"Algeria would hand over Qaddafi to ICC" http://english.alarabiya.net/articles/2011/08/30/164754.html Hahaha, very smart! Algeria officially with the ICC, but unofficially this never gonna happen. Nobody wants an open process on Qaddafi. He knows too much (remember financing of Sarkozy, for example), there is no hard evidence against mass murders.... That's why the NATO rebels told that they will not hand him over to ICC.
On September 01 2011 01:00 ImFromPortugal wrote: All african countries should send troops to aid Ghaddafi, enough is enough.
I guess unofficially they are already helping Libya in different ways... But Algeria has lost already 200.000 lives to islamists (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Algerian_Civil_War) and cannot stand al-Qaeda growing in the border country. Algeria has to act now! But it cannot in a direct way...
But no way NATO leaves the country. Remaining Gaddafi loyalists together with other African countries fight it back. So expect somebody official declare that NATO needs to bring troops on the ground "for peace and stability".
On September 01 2011 01:03 GeyzeR wrote: Nobody wants an open process on Qaddafi. He knows too much (remember financing of Sarkozy, for example), there is no hard evidence against mass murders.... That's why the NATO rebels told that they will not hand him over to ICC.
would just like to point out that if you're going to believe all you've been linking these past few days, why not go the extra mile (or perhaps extra inch in this case) and go ahead and believe NATO et al will just fabricate a few mass murders to suit their needs they've apparently been able to mindrape everyone and are part of a global conspiracy of the highest order so they can do whatever they want, no?
still waiting on those 20000 or w/e tribal troops coming to Tripoli btw, any time now
I could post a picture right from Lybia/Tripolis at a central place that shows people celebrating or wtf ever and one of you morons would say that this picture was made in some studio in Qatar...
Seriously, read what kind of stuff Geyzer and others have postet here.
Btw: You have to proof stuff, not me.
Ver,
My claim NATO is and has been lying from the start: Read this News reports its a direct interview August 27, 2011 The Secretary General of NATO, Anders Fogh Rasmussen.
Quotations from Rasmussen:
The Secretary General of NATO, Anders Fogh Rasmussen.
We have no forces under NATO command on the ground in Libya. We conduct our operations from the air and at sea with the aim to fully implement the UN mandate, which is to protect civilians.
Tuesday 23 August 2011 18.25 BST The Guardian has learned that a number of serving British special forces soldiers, as well as former SAS troopers, are advising and training rebel forces, although their presence is officially denied.
Telesurenglish op 25 jul 2011 The Libyan government showed a destroyed flu clinic and food warehouses it said had been hit earlier in the day by NATO airstrikes, killing eight people, the attacks took place in the town of Zlitan,140 kilometers east of the capital Tripoli. teleSUR
The Secretary General of NATO, Anders Fogh Rasmussen.
The Libyans have made their choice, the power of freedom has prevailed: it is not now a matter of hours, days at most.
The war is raging there have been no democratic process how can one claim as a foreigner the libyans have made their choice? What libyans does he means the NTC the Libyan Jihadist or the Libyan people?
The Secretary General of NATO, Anders Fogh Rasmussen.
But I want to emphasize that we will continue this mission until we can guarantee that no more threats against civilians in Libya.
How can he say that when there is evidence that NATO has been bombing and terrorizing the Libyan people.
One example of Terrorism: Bombing of the Great Man Made River pipes HRI has inquired NATO into this matter
Video Footage:
According to AP, Abdel-Hakim el-Shwehdy, head of the company running the project, said: “Major parts of the plant have been damaged. There could be major setback for the future projects.”
All sites that could be used by the pro-Qadhafi regime forces to threaten or attack civilians can be considered as a legitimate target by NATO in full accordance with UNSCR 1973. That resolution mandates the use of all necessary measures to protect civilians in Libya from attack or threat of attacks.
According to the NATO press office, the attack was within the rules of engagement agreed upon by all 28 countries in the coalition by consensus. It seems unlikely that the rules of engagement would allow this attack or that the states in the Security Council would agree that a devious interpretation of UN Security Council Resolution 1973 should supercede international humanitarian law. NATO have failed to provide answers to the following questions:
Do you have any concrete evidence that rockets were fired from inside the pipe-making plant? Can you explain the precise targeting and timing of strikes within this facility? What steps were taken to ensure collateral damage to the facility was avoided? What alternatives were considered to military strikes on this factory?
Bombing of Ziltan CNN reports that at the funeral Abubakr Ali watched volunteers carefully bury the bodies of his sister and two nephews next to the neighborhood mosque. According the family a third child, Naji aged 8, is in serious condition in hospital.
“This was a civilian home. No army, no military, no Gadhafi forces. It’s a family sleeping safely in their place,” he said. “This is the protection of civilians.”
The Secretary General of NATO, Anders Fogh Rasmussen.
We have prevented a massacre, saved many lives. Since we took responsibility for this operation, we conducted over 22,000 sorties and damaged or destroyed some 5,000 legitimate military targets, while protecting civilians against attack.
Death Toll ranges from 20k to 50k (preventing a massacre right???)
The Secretary General of NATO, Anders Fogh Rasmussen.
Precisely, can we trust the CNT?
I trust them. I attended meetings of the "contact group" [the body that brought together countries in March supporting the intervention], I have met directly with representatives of the CNT, and in the "contact group" as in bilateral meetings, they presented their road map.
CNT consist of ex-regime men of Gaddafi, funny how now all of a sudden they are credible and eligle to lead the country to a free and democratic state! Furthermore it has been admitted by the rebels that they have Al Qaeda within it ranks..
From Holy warrior to hero of a revolution: Abdelhakim Belhadj 25/08/2011 By Hossam Salama
Cairo, Asharq Al-Awsat – Abdelhakim Belhadj is the commander of the Libyan rebel Tripoli Military Council; he emerged as a leader during the Libyan rebels’ operation to liberate the Libyan capital from Gaddafi control. Belhadj is also a former Emir of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG), which was banned internationally as a terrorist organization following the 9/11 attacks.
The Secretary General of NATO, Anders Fogh Rasmussen.
So I say that we conducted our operations in strict accordance with the mandate of the UN. We were very careful to identify legitimate military targets
UN never send a fact finding team, Some Englishman did go there
The Security Council had not produced evidence to prove that its authorisation of the use of force was an appropriate response to the situation in Libya.
A group of African intellectuals has written an open letter criticising the NATO-led military attacks on Libya, saying Africa ran the risk of being re-colonised.
"Nato has violated international law... they had a regime change agenda," said one of the signatories, University of Johannesburg head of politics, Chris Landsberg.
"The re-colonisation of Africa is becoming a real threat," he told reporters in Johannesburg.
The letter was signed by more than 200 prominent Africans, including ANC national executive member Jesse Duarte, political analyst Willie Esterhuyse of the University of Stellenbosch, former intelligence minister Ronnie Kasrils, lawyer Christine Qunta, former deputy foreign affairs minister Aziz Pahad, former minister in the presidency Essop Pahad, Sam Moyo of the African Institute for Agrarian Studies, former president Thabo Mbeki's spokesperson Mukoni Ratshitanga, and poet Wally Serote.
If someone does not agree with this than try to point out what is wrong with the source supported with contradictory sources and not just "an opinion" so we can weight the 2 differences and establish what is true and untrue.
On September 01 2011 01:11 GeyzeR wrote: But no way NATO leaves the country. Remaining Gaddafi loyalists together with other African countries fight it back. So expect somebody official declare that NATO needs to bring troops on the ground "for peace and stability".
one Question Geyzer: If you conspiracy guys look back on such statements in a few months, when it is clear that the whole thing was bullshit, do you think, "well I guess I was wrong" or do you go on with "I guess they must have an even more cunning plan"..
Wondered the same, when the conspiracy specialists went nuts with the whole plans for world population control (too many people to control yo!) with SARS, chemtrails, avian flu or swine flu or just by killing us with the vaccines for swine flu etc. ... I mean, is there any chance for you to go like: "Well it was all bullshit and there isn't one huge world wide conspiracy"?
On September 01 2011 01:23 Taguchi wrote: would just like to point out that if you're going to believe all you've been linking these past few days, why not go the extra mile (or perhaps extra inch in this case) and go ahead and believe NATO et al will just fabricate a few mass murders to suit their needs they've apparently been able to mindrape everyone and are part of a global conspiracy of the highest order so they can do whatever they want, no? still waiting on those 20000 or w/e tribal troops coming to Tripoli btw, any time now
Sure they can fabricate. But why bother and feed the conspiracy theorists even more? And anyway he will talk and may say something that some would not like to expose.
The tribal troops will not come. These were rumors and Libyan officials have their own, weak and pathetic in comparison with the western, but still propaganda. And actually no need. It's impossible to win in an open battle while NATO is with rebels. Guerrilla mode is on. Most Libyans are passive and just waiting when it is over. Many experts predict a long civil war. We will see.
How do you like the new Libya? "Sharia law democracy"... it's getting better and better LOL, people you bought this too??
On September 01 2011 01:33 Nesto wrote: one Question Geyzer: If you conspiracy guys look back on such statements in a few months, ..
It was just my guess. There is no much news from Libya now, so I start guessing. I can be wrong. The conspiracy theory is that NATO is there to establish no fly zone and to protect civilians. These days proved wrong.
I do not know all the conspiracy theories, cannot discuss. Open a new topic and maybe I come and express my thoughts. Some of them I have learnt.
EPT
. Still cannot get used to it. This fast changing world... 
