Your claim is ridiculous. Try to count how many people do not support NATO rebels in internet forums, comments etc. Thousands! All paid by Gaddafi? I do not have to live in Libya to learn about Libya. And of course to use my brain and distinguish lie from truth. At least I give some reasons. You just play on emotions.
Bonus things to concider: The circles you regular are also visited by people who share the same views as you do because you look at and absorb the same material. You share a common goal, "the libyan conspiracy", and as most conspiracy freaks confirm your theories on reality amongst eachother. The other bonus thing to concider is that the vocal minority does not constitute the silent majority.
Edit: I'd like to make clear that I'm not arguing for you being some kind of internet mercenary as Suisen claims. I personally don't think so and I don't really think it matters if you were. What matters is your sources (or lack thereof), and things like how you dismiss legitimate sources for no apparent reason other than that they disagree with you and so forth.
Your claim is ridiculous. Try to count how many people do not support NATO rebels in internet forums, comments etc. Thousands! All paid by Gaddafi? I do not have to live in Libya to learn about Libya. And of course to use my brain and distinguish lie from truth. At least I give some reasons. You just play on emotions.
i didn't think i would ever say this, but i must agree with Geyzer here. This idea of an army of online mecenaries is a similarly ridiculous conspiracy theory. Also, it is in no way related to that article you linked, which goes more along the lines of "many young people are gullible and easily believe in propaganda", which is a much more sensible point of view. Sure, there might be some propaganda workers in the internet, but it being the internet there would seriously be no point at all in paying people from other countries as "online mercenaries" when you can have your own loyal and way more competent propaganda department at home.
But the main amount of people who support Gaddafi online are just people who want to feel smart by not believing the official story while instantly without questioning believing any non-official story they are told as the absolute truth. They also tend to come to ridiculous conclusions like "Bombers hit civilians ---> Bombers intentionally target civilians", instead of thinking about the possibility that sometimes people make mistakes, which can still lead to bad things. Not everything that happens is the intended goal of someone in some greater evil conspirationary plan.
Your claim is ridiculous. Try to count how many people do not support NATO rebels in internet forums, comments etc. Thousands! All paid by Gaddafi? I do not have to live in Libya to learn about Libya. And of course to use my brain and distinguish lie from truth. At least I give some reasons. You just play on emotions.
How can you call what you do 'not supporting NATO? The only thing I see you doing is supporting Gaddafi. You use the same propaganda as his regime does.
How can you make a statement like: "If Gaddafi were that bad dictator, people would find a way to overthrow him..." considering this is what happened. People overthrowing a dictator looks like this, minus the NATO bombing. Why do you think the regime in Iran doesn't fall? You believe they have the support of the people? Syria?
All you do is post conspiracy theories. About how the Green square images are staged somewhere else. About how Gaddafi has 40,000 loyal brave fighters. About how NATO commits atrocities. About Al Qaeda, etc. You even link to his site and ask people to read the Green Book.
All these absurd things you claim while you keep being an apologist for Gaddafi
Not supporting NATO would be my position. You only discredit actual western people who have issues with western foreign policy to the arab spring.
You don't raise the issue that this NATO intervention tries to hijack the arab spring. That it doesn't have the arab league support which was crucial in getting the UN resolution. That this makes it harder to get Russia and China to support a resolution against Assad. That this bombing of Libya for the sake of democracy is a strange thing to do when you won't even utter the words to support democracy in the case of Bahrein or Saudi Arabia. That the west should only have made a no fly zone and then look for a way to get rid of the Gaddafi regime in a peaceful way, etc.
No. All you do is copy Gaddafi propaganda that a natural opponent of western imperialism would never think of. You also show time and time again you have no respect at all for the Libyan people in general. It's their fucking country. If they want to overthrow a secular country for an Islamist sharia state, then that's their fucking right even if it this was the case. I think NATO bombing Libya is western imperialism. I don't support it. But you shit full this thread with pro Gaddafi propaganda just to make a buck. How do you think the people oblivious to western imperialism are ever going to be made aware of it when criticism of western foreigh n policy is drowned by this dribble? Not to mention the lives that are involved. People are dying and you are just sitting in your western country, France or whatever it is, posting away for the violent dictator. Disgusting.
In the unlikely case you truly aren't a Gaddafi online mercenary but just a young rebellious teenager. Know you will look back with shame on this when you grow up and please please reconsider what you are doing right here immediately.
[edit] To add to the Gaddafi online mercenary theory, these people don't post in any other politician threads. They keep spamming this thread with strange articles and news. Saif doing a speech, Green Square staged, foreign legion in Libya, western mercenaries, orphans abducted, western special forces, Gaddafi being a hero, etc. We never see them post anything else like about the Abu Salim prison, about the bodies found that were burned, about Gaddafi family villas, etc. They just keep posting pro Gaddafi, not even anti NATO, spin. We never saw this with Iran 2 years ago here on TL. The furthest we got then was Xeris expressing his doubts. But he is of Iranian descent at least. It's either Gaddafi mercenaries or SC2 being released. But we didn't even see this with Egypt. The Egypt events had a lot of discussion going on. No one really brought up anything like what we see now. And here we have 10 pages filled with this spam. With Egypt we only had people worried about Israel and about the Brotherhood. But they didn't even support Mubarak. We never had someone post about what a hero Mubarak was and how he deserved to rule since he served his country so well. You know the propaganda line he used. Also, the article I linked does indeed talk about western online Gaddafi mercenaries. But it talks about facebook and not fora.
Unless i majorly misunderstand that article, it basically says that there are western people who believe Gaddafi Propaganda and spread it further. It also says that he probably buys some selected reporters to gain favorable articles written. It does not say that he somehow pays random western people to post on facebook and in random forums. Which honestly also would not make any sense at all.
Paying journalists to write the articles you want is effective propaganda. Paying random incompetent people to post in forums is not. Especially when you could just do the same thing better with a more competently trained full-time propaganda department in you own country for a far smaller amount of money, since there is absolutely know advantage in being from a western country when posting on the internet. Everyone can do it and claim to be from whereever he wants to.
Edit: Which would technically make them online soldiers, not mercenaries, since they are fighting for their own specific country and not for everyone that offers money.
Whats with everyone denouncing other opinions as conspiracy theories? The only people posting any sources at all are the so called 'conspiracy theorists.' And Suisen online mercenaries paid by Gaddafi posting in forums? Is that a joke? And we are the conspiracy theorists? Thats the dumbest thing I have read in this entire thread.
Just because a source is not from a western mainstream news agency does not discredit it. Saji and Geyzer have been posting sources to back up any claims they make, The majority of rebutles so far have been slander and unsubstantiated hearsay.
There are more independant jounalists coming out with stories everyday that completely contradict the 'official' story being portrayed in the mainstream media. The fact that there is so much counter evidence continually coming forth speaks to the credibility of the mainstream media a little bit in my opinion.
Having an open mind and considering more than just the mainstream does not make someone a conspiracy theorist. And immediately denouncing someone as such I think speaks more to the faults in your own arguments than disproving theirs.
On September 01 2011 11:43 Aurocaido wrote: Just because a source is not from a western mainstream news agency does not discredit it. Saji and Geyzer have been posting sources to back up any claims they make, The majority of rebutles so far have been slander and unsubstantiated hearsay.
So you missed the part where I ripped some of those sources apart, right?
These are a small sample, all from a source you used. While Amnesty International has been critical of both sides, there are many, many more articles critical of Gaddafi and his forces.
And, as a funny little side note, I was unable to find anything relating to the article you posted on Amnesty's official site. The date of your article is June 24, and none of the amnesty articles in June have anything to do with it. I couldn't verify any of the claims in your article on the actual Amnesty site. You used this source. Let's see you backtrack and discredit it.
On September 01 2011 11:43 Aurocaido wrote: Just because a source is not from a western mainstream news agency does not discredit it. Saji and Geyzer have been posting sources to back up any claims they make, The majority of rebutles so far have been slander and unsubstantiated hearsay.
So you missed the part where I ripped some of those sources apart, right?
These are a small sample, all from a source you used. While Amnesty International has been critical of both sides, there are many, many more articles critical of Gaddafi and his forces.
And, as a funny little side note, I was unable to find anything relating to the article you posted on Amnesty's official site. The date of your article is June 24, and none of the amnesty articles in June have anything to do with it. I couldn't verify any of the claims in your article on the actual Amnesty site. You used this source. Let's see you backtrack and discredit it.
Ok I followed the link as well and it took me to a news site. The site has articles for and against Gaddafi? Awesome, I like my news sources to cover both sides of the story not just one. I don't understand however, how posting these other stories discredits the source he posted?
Just because a source is not from a western mainstream news agency does not discredit it. Saji and Geyzer have been posting sources to back up any claims they make, The majority of rebutles so far have been slander and unsubstantiated hearsay.
What you mean is Saji and Geyzer are backing up their libel with more libel.
Just because a source is not from a western mainstream news agency does not discredit it. Saji and Geyzer have been posting sources to back up any claims they make, The majority of rebutles so far have been slander and unsubstantiated hearsay.
What you mean is Saji and Geyzer are backing up their libel with more libel.
On September 01 2011 12:32 Aurocaido wrote: Ok I followed the link as well and it took me to a news site. The site has articles for and against Gaddafi? Awesome, I like my news sources to cover both sides of the story not just one. I don't understand however, how posting these other stories discredits the source he posted?
Because the link that he posted uses Amnesty International as a source, but when you look at the Amnesty site that information is nowhere to be found. The article he posted cherry picked information supporting his side of the argument without looking at the massive amount of reported human rights abuses Gaddafi and his supporters have made. That is bias, pure and simple.
While we're at it, why must you listen to both sides of a story and give them both equal weight? If a story about murder or sexual abuse is posted, do you look for reasons why they "may have had it coming?" Would you listen to a white supremacist and give his argument just as much credence as a holocaust survivor? I'm not trying to attack you, I'm just really struggling to understand how fully presenting both sides is helpful in every situation. In some, yes, but I don't really think this is one of those times.
At the danger of pushing this thread which seems to have become about posters rather than events even further off topic...
How about if I say that the west -The U.S. in particular in the last century or so- supports or ignores dictators which allow it to have military bases and access to resources. That dictators which attempt to nationalise resources or in other ways reduce the west influence on the internal working of their government tend to get attacked or assassinated.
If I can provide repeated historical examples that show this pattern in action.
While making it clear that I see this as "One solid interpretation of the data" Then asking posters of examples of strong positive outcomes which resulted from the West's interfearence in the soverign affairs of other nations.
Dapper_Cad, they never talk about that. They never do. They only have pro Gaddafi propaganda that has so far has even been debunked.
France, UK and the US are the trinity of imperial powers so it's all quite ironic. But the two conspiracy people never talked about their motives or intentions. They never talk about how the unfrozen funds can be used as huge leverage.
They also never talk about how the Libyan people preferred this over Gaddafi. They don't even understand what you are talking about. They are ignorant kids hired by Gaddafi.
On September 01 2011 11:43 Aurocaido wrote: Just because a source is not from a western mainstream news agency does not discredit it. Saji and Geyzer have been posting sources to back up any claims they make, The majority of rebutles so far have been slander and unsubstantiated hearsay.
So you missed the part where I ripped some of those sources apart, right?
These are a small sample, all from a source you used. While Amnesty International has been critical of both sides, there are many, many more articles critical of Gaddafi and his forces.
And, as a funny little side note, I was unable to find anything relating to the article you posted on Amnesty's official site. The date of your article is June 24, and none of the amnesty articles in June have anything to do with it. I couldn't verify any of the claims in your article on the actual Amnesty site. You used this source. Let's see you backtrack and discredit it.
Ok I followed the link as well and it took me to a news site. The site has articles for and against Gaddafi? Awesome, I like my news sources to cover both sides of the story not just one. I don't understand however, how posting these other stories discredits the source he posted?
Because supposedly the source Geyser posted had its source as Amnesty International, yet apparently Amnesty International doesn't appear to have said that. Thus, if true, Geyzer's source falsely cited a source, completely discrediting the entire article. If that's the case, that is.
On September 01 2011 13:08 Dapper_Cad wrote: How about if I say that the west -The U.S. in particular in the last century or so- supports or ignores dictators which allow it to have military bases and access to resources. That dictators which attempt to nationalise resources or in other ways reduce the west influence on the internal working of their government tend to get attacked or assassinated.
If I can provide repeated historical examples that show this pattern in action.
While making it clear that I see this as "One solid interpretation of the data" Then asking posters of examples of strong positive outcomes which resulted from the West's interfearence in the soverign affairs of other nations.
Does that make me a wild consipracy theorist?
No, these are well-documented in mainstream news sources, and are accepted as standard realpolitk in the international relations field, even if they are frowned upon by most people. Nation-states look after their own self-interest (and the interest of their most powerful constituents) more than they care about democratic ideals.
We understand also that the United States and NATO may have ulterior motives for supporting the rebels at this point.
However, this does not mean that NATO is deliberately bombing civilians, nor does it change the fact that Gaddafi has slaughtered his people, etc. Until you can find a legitimate source to dispute the mountains of evidence to the contrary, it's just a conspiracy theory to disagree with information supported by reputable new sources across the board.
On September 01 2011 13:16 FabledIntegral wrote: Because supposedly the source Geyser posted had its source as Amnesty International, yet apparently Amnesty International doesn't appear to have said that. Thus, if true, Geyzer's source falsely cited a source, completely discrediting the entire article. If that's the case, that is.
That's the long and short of it. I'm not saying that it isn't there, but I am saying please find it because I can't and I've looked.
I'll fully admit that the West doesn't have the best track record with destabilizing regimes, but I have not seen evidence that this rebellion was incited by "Western Imperialist forces" instead of as a response to the other civil demonstrations that have swept the area. That, to me, would indicate that we won't be sweeping in and messing everything up.
News! from Serge Djibre, special correspondent of "AbidjanDirect" in Tripoli. "AbidjanDirect" is one of the biggest french language newspaper in Ivory Coast and Africa overall. It is very close, almost official to the president Alassane Ouattara, which was put in this position by French Legion. So it is no way anti-west.
Information on the theater has evolved a lot since yesterday. In Tripoli, contrary to the information distilled by the Western press, each side keeps its positions. NATO control only part of the city where are located the business district and the embassies. The Libyan army and the resistance control their living quarters. If the capital Tripoli, things did not change much this is not the same for other cities. Of confirmed data tell us that the great movement had taken place since last night. Indeed, after an offensive against the instigation of the special forces led by Khamis Al-Gaddafi the Libyan army regained control of several cities including Fashlum, Zliten, Sabha and Bani Walid. Hubs Ras Lanuf, Brega, Ras-it and southern Libya is under the control of the armed we can say unequivocally that the armed control over 70 percent of Libya. On the side of NATO , heavy losses are announced. On the night of yesterday, the Canadian warship Harltaun (Charlestown) was severely damaged in the port of Misurata. The British warship Liverpool has also fired shells and comes out with some damage. After the fighting at night, three NATO helicopters were shot at dawn around 5 am. All its operations are directed by the master arm Major General Khamis Al-Qadhafi has yet been announced dead. Seif Gaddafi in Tripoli, which is present and takes part in the fighting promised his supporters to present a surprise in days. He also warned against the subversion of the Western media who try to present cities in the hands of insurgents to maintain the morale of his past, which is currently at a low level. Having urged the Libyan forces to keep morale high and faith in the promise of victory soon, they announced the imminent resumption of the distribution of state television throughout the territory. Kacou Vana in Collaboration with Serge Djibre
Guys, we have too much debate over sources etc and this ruins the topic. The debate will never end because you say "Give me the confirmation from X that X is guilty". Simple logic suggests that it may be difficult. Instead I object the statement: "Only X can be legit source of information". For me a newspaper from Ivory Coast is also a source. There is a world outside of the West, you know.
On September 01 2011 16:48 GeyzeR wrote: News! from Serge Djibre, special correspondent of "AbidjanDirect" in Tripoli. "AbidjanDirect" is one of the biggest french language newspaper in Ivory Coast and Africa overall. It is very close, almost official to the president Alassane Ouattara, which was put in this position by French Legion. So it is no way anti-west.
You're lying. It's not a major newspaper at all; all major Ivory Coast newspapers can be found in this list here. Furthermore, this website was only created in April, and it's commenters are overwhelmingly Gaddafi supporters (if they're not sockpuppets). It's most likely just another part of Gaddafi's propaganda machine.
On top of that, the story is also ridiculous. There is no such Canadian warship named the "Charlestown"; the closest would be the HMCS Charlottetown, which left Libya a week ago. If three NATO helicopters were actually shot down it would be all over the news the way it always is when one is shot down.
On September 01 2011 16:48 GeyzeR wrote:Guys, we have too much debate over sources etc and this ruins the topic. The debate will never end because you say "Give me the confirmation from X that X is guilty". Simple logic suggests that it may be difficult. Instead I object the statement: "Only X can be legit source of information". For me a newspaper from Ivory Coast is also a source. There is a world outside of the West, you know.
I’m now speaking to you from the outskirts of Tripoli.
I would like to reassure our brothers everywhere that now just gone noon; we passed by Al-Azizya.
We met the youth over there; we also met our brothers in Wershefana, we also met some people from Nawahiy El Arbaa.
We also visited the areas adjacent to Tripoli, we have seen people today in high spirits, and we also met some youth from the inner areas such as those from Abu Sleem and also those from El-Hadba.
They reassured me of the situation on the inside, I would like to reassure people that we are present, everything is fine and the struggle is on-going and that victory is near.
Today our brothers also relayed me a message that there was a big tribal meeting in Werfalla & Bani Walid in which they decided: to reply to the verbal threats that were received from the armed rebels and rats that said that they must surrender or we will use military force to storm into Bani Walid. They took a majority decision: “to hell with you and to hell with NATO this is our country we live and die on it”.
Werfalla is not scared of you or your allies (NATO), we are foregoing with the struggle and resistance until victory, despite NATO hitting several houses inside the city and killing whole families inside the city, but they have buried their martyrs and this has only increased their resolve.
As for the area of Fezzan; this is completely united with all its tribes in its loyalty to the leader. They also had a collection of meetings today, with the same conclusion: that no one is scared and that no one will surrender.
They also said that our grandfathers and parents fought the Italian colonial forces when they were bare footed and naked, not today.
As for the threats against Sirte, they have replied to them: try and enter Sirte, you think that entering Sirte is a walk in the park. Sirte has more than 20,000 armed youth fully equipped to defend it and are ready. We have bypassed Sirte by several stages we are on our way to victories and claiming areas and they’re talking of taking over Sirte!
This is a media campaign to distort public perception and to create chaos and confusion.
We would like to also tell the other cities that we are defiant and that the leadership is in good health and that the leader himself is well and that we are happy and that everything is normal (drinking tea and coffee) and that we are in our country defending it.
There is also another message to our brothers in; Tobruk, Al Bayda, Benghazi, El Marj, Zlitan, Tripoli that they should be prepared to move now, any place that is infested with rats then you shouldn’t stand there you need to attack them, checkpoints should also be attacked and destroyed, you need to bleed them day and night until this country is cleared from these armed rebels. All of you are responsible and your leadership is responsible for you.
All Libyans are Muammar Al-Gadaffi; all Libyans are Saif El-Islam, all Libyans are Khamis Muammar, wherever you find the enemy you must strike! The enemy is weak and they have sustained great losses and they’re healing their wounds.
Bab Al-Azizya to those liars is a military base that has been razed with 64 NATO sortie missions over the last seven months and this military base is open to the masses. We have withdrawn our military personal from there in anticipation of NATO airstrikes there on a daily basis, entering and leaving Bab Al-Azizya doesn’t mean anything at all, everyday there are festivities and musical acts going on there and people have set up tents there. It has been razed to the ground and all military equipment has been moved elsewhere.
These armed rebels are trying to create psychological warfare, scare and confuse people. I would like to tell people not to be afraid and that the military is well, the arm depots are in good form. All the tribes that have received threats; Tarhoona, Khums, Bani Walid, Sirte, Wershefana, Nawahiy El Arbaa, El Ejilat all the tribes I have contacted personally and have affirmed that we have received threats: “you either surrender or we kill you” and their response was “that this is our country which we will not neglect and that we will fight till the last bullet”.
Everything is fine Alhamdulillah, and victory is forthcoming very soon Inshallah. This is our country they’re the ones that will be exiled and will have to leave along with their stooges NATO, France etc. should pack their bags and leave. The best proof of this is that these convoys of traitors and armed rebels was destroyed on Al-Shaat Street in Tripoli, the people of Tripoli know this story, the presence of foreign mercenaries and fighters that aren’t even Arab amongst this convoy that was destroyed.
They have brought British Special Forces to fight alongside them that has been admitted by them and Italians and French and other entities that are fighting with them for money, as for us we are fighting for the sake of Libya and for the people of Libya and on our land.
As for our brothers that have made taped confessions, they’ve rung me later on to say that their daughters and wife’s where taken hostages under gun point and that these confessions where under duress. That they were told to either say what they were told or be that their family would be filtered off (killed). This doesn’t mean anything; they’ve stormed into a few key figures in the Libyan Government whilst away on their farms, who’ve woken up to these armed rebels surrounding them and they were taken as captives and where told “you either say as we do, or we will kill your sons and daughters”. This is one of the dirty tricks of the armed rebels who have no manners.
As for NATO, you are the dumbest alliance in the world and that you are stupid people, even the individual that you have installed and is persistent on operations in Tripoli, was he not in Al-Qaeda? , wasn’t he captured by the CIA and handed over to Libya then we forgave him and that he is a worldwide wanted terrorist. He is there now with his terrorist accomplices and friends leading operations, you stupid people are now backing these snakes and hopefully they’ll backfire on you.
In conclusion I would like to reassure you, and to confirm to our people that this stuff is true that during my visit to Wershefana, Nawahiy El Arbaa and Al-Azizya the rats were nowhere to be seen and that the checkpoints were vacant. I would like to tell our people that are afraid and scared indoors not to be so and to go out and to resist and to face the enemy, day and night , day and night the people of Abu Sleem And El-Hadba and the martyrs of Sidi Abdul Jalil and 2nd of March district and the other neighbourhoods to organise and arm themselves and to continue the fight and that we are coming to liberate Green Square God willing (Inshallah) and that we are fine and “victory or death” and God is great (Allahu Akbar).
'NATO used UN resolution as chewing gum' Published: 31 August, 2011, 17:15 Edited: 01 September, 2011, 09:44
“We have to be very careful with regards to what official NATO representatives say today, because statements of tens of thousands of bombs and other ammunition being dropped on Libya having no adverse effect on civilians – that’s what NATO has been claiming – that’s very hard to believe,” Dmitry Rogozin told RT. “That defines that we should be careful with regard to official statements from Brussels.”
Russia’s ambassador to the alliance also noted that NATO deliberately and openly went beyond UN resolution 1973 that allowed for maintenance of a “no-fly zone” over Libya.
“The 1973 resolution was used by NATO as a chewing gum, so to say. I think that NATO might be deliberately demonstrating its disregard for the UN Security Council, to demonstrate that NATO is equal to the United Nations nowadays and will be getting even more significant and powerful in the future,” he said.
Russia recognizes Libya's National Transitional Council Published: 01 September, 2011, 10:49
Moscow has recognized Libya's National Transitional Council as the legitimate governing authority. Russia has become the 75th country to officially recognize the Council.
Speaking shortly after the announcement, Russia’s foreign minister, Sergey Lavrov, said Russia had not wanted Gaddafi to remain in power, but opposed NATO's methods of removing him. “Russia has never approved of the former Libyan regime. Back in May, President Medvedev clearly stated that Gaddafi should go. But the way the United Nations resolutions were implemented by some NATO members and a few other states meant that the principle of the supremacy of law was being disregarded. The African Union and UN initiatives were ignored, leading to an increase in the number of civilian casualties – although it is the protection of the civilian population that was set as the major objective of the Security Council resolutions, and NATO subscribed to implementing them,” stated the minister.
Meanwhile, Colonel Gaddafi's son Saif Al Islam has vowed to fight to the death, saying nobody will surrender in the town of Sirte – the last loyalist stronghold.
EPT
