Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Libya - civil unrest & now NATO involvement

I'm asking you to post up the evidence of these mass atrocities you've predicted, and apparently insist are still taking place. I'm not denying that the few isolated incidents that have been reported have taken place, though I don't agree that this is likely to be the tip of the iceberg (at least not a very big iceberg), given the amount of reporters there are over there operating relatively freely in rebel held areas as far as I can see.

I have posted literally dozens of cases of gross human rights abuses. You have attempted to dismiss them all. That is denialism. The deliberate attempt to deny that systematic atrocities have been carried out despite the evidence because such atrocities do not fit your agenda.
As for Western reporters, let's not even bother to question the bias of a Western news agenda that quite happily labelled innocent black African migrant workers "mercenaries" or that printed the most outrageous bullshit about the Gaddafi regime handing out viagra to troops as part of a mass rape campaign (both of which have been thoroughly discredited btw) while ignoring or downplaying rebel atrocities. Despite this there have been numerous reports of atrocities and mass graves most notably by the telegraph which itself points out that they were deliberately prevented from investigating such reports by rebel forces

Since the bodies were seen by the Daily Telegraph attempts to discover their identities have been unsuccessful, in part because of obstruction by rebel authorities in the area. Having highlighted the discovery to those authorities the area was subsequently bulldozed and the bodies dissappeared...suspicions have been raised after the rebel authorities disposed of the bodies and bull-dozed the site where they were found.

Drivers also said they had military orders not to take journalists to the site. "If you go there I will ditch you in the desert," the driver of another news organisation reportedly said.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...rrying-questions-about-Libyas-rebel-army.html
 
Likewise the battle for Tripoli could be a drawn out and bloody affair, but there remain other possibilities. It was only about 3 weeks ago that you claimed Gaddafi controlled more of the country than he did at the beginning of the uprising. Even if that was sort of true in some sense, it was lousy as a guide to what would happen in August.
.

As of 4.45 gmt Tajoraa, Suq al-Jumaa, Arada and al-Sabaain Tripoli are under full control of the opposition with fighting in Ben Ashhour, Fashlom, and Zawiyat al-Dahmani districts


Boat loads of fighters from Mistrata have entered Tripoli port and on land are only 27km away
. To the west they have now taken the base of the Khamis Brigade and 'The rebels were seizing large stores of weapons from the base, driving away with truckloads of new supplies''. They are now also advancing from Gharyan in the south

Once they capture the main tv and radio stations it will all be over
 
yes, you keep posting up the same examples, which pretty much makes my point for me. While the actions of the rebels after this discovery do raise suspicions, as was pointed out at the time and in this article, it's not clear who was responsible for the deaths.

also, the articles you point to seem to have a fairly consistent theme that you're somehow missing out when you quote from them.

Both organisations say these are not on the scale of the abuses perpetrated by the regime. "We have come across a number of cases of executions of suspected Gaddafi fighters in both the east and the west," said Peter Bouckaert, emergencies director of HRW.

"I does fit a consistent pattern, though I don't think these killings are authorised by the rebel authorities in Benghazi."
Diana Eltahawy, of Amnesty, said members of the Transitional National Council, the rebel government, had admitted to there being a problem with some of their troops but had not done enough to tackle it.
"There is no comparison with the Gaddafi side. But the concern is that there is not sufficient will to address this in the leadership," she said. "It needs to be stopped before it becomes worse."

I also think you'd be wrong if you think most western reporters would actually cover up war crimes if they discovered them.
 
As of 4.45 gmt Tajoraa, Suq al-Jumaa, Arada and al-Sabaain Tripoli are under full control of the opposition with fighting in Ben Ashhour, Fashlom, and Zawiyat al-Dahmani districts

Boat loads of fighters from Mistrata have entered Tripoli port and on land are only 27km away
. To the west they have now taken the base of the Khamis Brigade and 'The rebels were seizing large stores of weapons from the base, driving away with truckloads of new supplies''. They are now also advancing from Gharyan in the south

Once they capture the main tv and radio stations it will all be over
where's that from?

if true, I hope they've got enough volunteers going in to both take the city, and prevent the type of reprisals taking place that dylans predicts. IF they do manage to take the city, the main danger IMO is likely to come from reprisal killings by residents in the city against known informers, secret police members and other regime supporters, so the rebels need to be able to go in with enough personnel to prevent this. If misrata have sent in boatloads, then hopefully benghazi won't be far behind as it will surely take forces from both cities and beyond to accomplish this with a relatively orderly transition.
 
People in tripoli have been organising behind the regimes back for months - the rebels want them to be able to get revenge. It does a bit of their job for them.
 
I don't think its safe to say that the stuff we know about is the tip of the iceberg. It might be, but I think you consistently deliver your predictions in far too confident a language.

Likewise the battle for Tripoli could be a drawn out and bloody affair, but there remain other possibilities. It was only about 3 weeks ago that you claimed Gaddafi controlled more of the country than he did at the beginning of the uprising. Even if that was sort of true in some sense, it was lousy as a guide to what would happen in August.

Personally I continue to reserve judgement as to the exact level of support for Gaddafi in Tripoli - its clear there is lots on display, but I'm very interested to see what happens when Gaddafi's coercion forces are no longer a factor. Not that I expect to get to the absolute truth of popular opinion then, for there will be a new flag that Libyan people will need to wave enthusiastically in order to to save their skins.

It's not unreasonable to assume that in a war far more happens away from news reports than reaches them. This is probably the case in every war in history, I see no reason why this war should be any different. How much isn't really the point. The point is some here are trying to paint the rebel forces as lilly white freedom fighters enjoying universal support of the population and that clearly isn't the case. The truth is that this is a civil war with a divided population. The fact is without NATO support this rebellion would never have got near to Tripoli and that fact can't simply be dismissed by talk of regime repression.

The question of Tripoli is much more interesting. There are several reasons why I don't think Tripoli is going to be the cakewalk that the twitter rumours seem to claim it will be.

Rebel forces have taken Zawiya, important strategically for sure, as it provides the opportunity to strangle the supply lines for the Capital, but Loyalist forces there have not been defeated or captured. They have retreated towards the Capital where they have dug in for defence. I am not downplaying the significance of the fall of Zawiya. It is very significant and probably does spell the beginning of the end for Gaddafi, but its significance is in terms of enforcing a siege on Tripoli, not in taking the Capital by force which is an entirely different ball game entirely.

Tripoli is a city of 2 million. Assaulting it presents the worst kind of warfare, against a well trained army that has had time to dig in and most importantly, an armed force that has everything to lose by defeat. Such an assault requires a huge force of well trained men with efficient supply routes, two things that there is little evidence the rebels possess. It involves murderous house to house fighting, something that always favours defenders. (something that would also have been true of Benghazi if Gaddafi's assault there had taken place)

Furthermore, in such an environment NATO has limited capability. Air strikes in built up urban areas risk the population, something that they are supposedly forbidden to do by the terms of the UN resolution. We know that this resolution has basically been ignored anyway but it is one thing to ignore it when attacking Gaddafi forces and quite another when flattening neighbourhoods.

The traditional strategy for laying siege to a city is to surround it, cut off its resources (starve it) bombard it and then finally assault it. In Tripoli this runs the risk of massive civilian (and rebel) casualties.

For these reasons I predict that Tripoli will not fall to an assault any time soon but rather we may be seeing the beginning of a prolonged siege. A siege that carries its own problems most notably the suffering inflicted on the population a prolonged siege.

Of course, all this could mean nothing if the regime simply collapses. Not something I rule out. Although I think we should be wary of writing of a regime that has shown great tenacity and stubbornness thus far. Not to mention the loyalty of large sections of its population.
 
A couple of photos of black people definately not being mistreated by rebels
rebels-killing-africans.jpg


libyan-rebels.jpg


http://theredphoenixapl.org/2011/07/11/u-s-helps-rebels-murdering-black-libyans/
erm, there's not mistreatment going on in those photos, just photo's of people being arrested at gun point. FFS they've not even been hooded or had their hands tied with zip ties as they would have been if it had been UK or US forces arresting them.

the only actual photo in that article showing a dead black person is the one below headlined "Black Libyan killed by Libyan rebels", which conveniently misses the fact that he's wearing camouflage clothing, and wearing a green bandana that would identify him as being a Gadhafi soldier of some type.
libyan-rebels-kill-black-libyan111.jpg


The allegations of ethnic cleansing of blacks from Misrata is simply a false rewriting of history, as the evacuation of foreign nationals from misrata was an international effort carried out with the UK in the lead, taking place at the time when Gadhafi's forces had the city under siege, were shelling it and the port (including the ships taking part in the evacuation) from the cities outskirts, and had snipers across the city killing anyone who moved. The fact you'd quote such bullshit as evidence to support your assertions says a lot about your critical appraisal of those sources IMO.
 
Both organisations say these are not on the scale of the abuses perpetrated by the regime.

So what? Comparisons with regime violence is fatuous and dishonest. The rebels should be judged on their own terms not Gaddafi's. The fact that the regime commits atrocities does not justify the rebels doing so. Especially when it is the rebels who are supposedly fighting for democracy.
 
Free Spirit that last post really is shameful, It is denialism of atrocities. The persecution of black Africans and black Libyans is well documented by human rights organisation, the fact that you choose to deny them is quite outrageous frankly
 
So what? Comparisons with regime violence is fatuous and dishonest. The rebels should be judged on their own terms not Gaddafi's. The fact that the regime commits atrocities does not justify the rebels doing so. Especially when it is the rebels who are supposedly fighting for democracy.
bollocks, it's entirely relevant.

It's pretty clear that if we'd not supported the rebels and Gadhafi had been allowed to take back control of these areas far far more people would have been subject to summary arrest, torture, imprisonment, and death than has taken place in the areas now controlled by rebels. That's pretty much the entire fucking point tbh. I don't think anyone genuinely expects a relatively rag tag rebel army to be capable of entirely preventing all such activities, and to be entirely whiter than white, that would be very naive, but this is entirely different to state orchestrated attacks on civilians, mass arrests and torture that was the alternative.
 
bollocks, it's entirely relevant.

It's pretty clear that if we'd not supported the rebels and Gadhafi had been allowed to take back control of these areas far far more people would have been subject to summary arrest, torture, imprisonment, and death than has taken place in the areas now controlled by rebels. That's pretty much the entire fucking point tbh. I don't think anyone genuinely expects a relatively rag tag rebel army to be capable of entirely preventing all such activities, and to be entirely whiter than white, that would be very naive, but this is entirely different to state orchestrated attacks on civilians, mass arrests and torture that was the alternative.

Well you continue to excuse, deny and apologise for gross human rights violations and I will continue to condemn them regardless of who carries them out.

More footage of black people definitely not being murdered by rebels.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltnDfgyHC78&skipcontrinter=1

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=02a_1301531604
 
Free Spirit that last post really is shameful, It is denialism of atrocities. The persecution of black Africans and black Libyans is well documented by human rights organisation, the fact that you choose to deny them is quite outrageous frankly
for someone who's compared this to the holocaust, you've not really got much right left to determine what is and isn't an outrageous position IMO.

i'm merely pointing out that the evacuation of misrata was an international effort carried out largely to take migrant workers out of danger from the indiscriminate shelling and sniping being carried out by Gadhafi's troops, as well as the siege conditions the city was under at the time, with any persecution that may have been taking place being a relatively minor factor. To label this as ethnic cleansing is utter bollocks, demonstrably so given that most of the evacuees were initially taken to benghazi.
 
for someone who's compared this to the holocaust, you've not really got much right left to determine what is and isn't an outrageous position IMO.

i'm merely pointing out that the evacuation of misrata was an international effort carried out largely to take migrant workers out of danger from the indiscriminate shelling and sniping being carried out by Gadhafi's troops, as well as the siege conditions the city was under at the time, with any persecution that may have been taking place being a relatively minor factor. To label this as ethnic cleansing is utter bollocks, demonstrably so given that most of the evacuees were initially taken to benghazi.

I'm not comparing this to the holocaust you dishonest shit. I am comparing your cynical denial of atrocities for your own political ends to those who deny the holocaust for their political ends. You have been shown example after example after example of gross human rights abuses by rebel forces. You have been shown articles, personal testimonies, eyewitness reports, journalistic investigations, photographic evidence and shocking video footage of executions and murder...and you dismiss them all, You dismiss them all because they don't fit your personal political agenda. That makes you an atrocity denialist every bit as contemptible as those who deny the holocaust.What is the difference between the blind refusal to accept that Jews were persecuted and murdered and your blind refusal to accept that black people are being persecuted and murdered. One of scale for sure but not of kind.
 
I'm not comparing this to the holocaust you dishonest shit.
why bring it up at all then?
its like arguing with a holocaust denier and only slightly less unpleasant

That makes you no different to those who wish to deny atrocities in Chechnya or Sri Lanka or Gaza or indeed Nazi Germany. You tell me, what is the difference between denying the mass murder of Jews and denying the mass murder of black people?

looks like you making comparisons to the holocaust to me, but if you aren't then maybe you'd stop bringing it up at all given that it's blatantly nothing like it.
 
why bring it up at all then?

looks like you making comparisons to the holocaust to me, but if you aren't then maybe you'd stop bringing it up at all given that it's blatantly nothing like it.
It's you that keeps bringing it up. How about you stop this shameful denial of the racist persecution of black people by rebel forces?
 
What is the difference between the blind refusal to accept that Jews were persecuted and murdered and your blind refusal to accept that black people are being persecuted and murdered. One of scale for sure but not of kind.
I'm not denying that some black people have been targeted in a few places, largely towards the beginning of the uprising, apparently largely as a result of the initial stories of african mercenaries being used by gadhafi.

You linked to a report that described misrata as being the scene of ethnic cleansing however, which is utter bollocks. You've not shown me a single piece of evidence to support this specific claim, nor have you accepted that it was bollocks.
 
do you support the claim of ethnic cleansing in misrata made in the article you linked to - yes or no?

Yes I support those claims. They are true. Not only for Misrata but for the nearby black lIbyan town of Tawergha. Rebel forces have made no secret of their intentions towards these black Libyans.

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.”

Now not only Tawergha has been ethnically cleansed but so has Misrata itself.

nearly four-fifths of residents of Misrata’s Ghoushi neighborhood were Tawergha natives. Now they are gone or in hiding, fearing revenge attacks by Misratans, amid reports of bounties for their capture.

And there is little doubt about the racist nature of the hatred towards them.

Some of the hatred of Tawergha has racist overtones that were mostly latent before the current conflict. On the road between Misrata and Tawergha, rebel slogans like “the brigade for purging slaves, black skin” have supplanted pro-Gadhafi scrawl.

It is unclear how many families still live in Tawergha, which has turned into staging grounds for government troops. Many are believed to be in a government-administered camp in al-Haisha farther south.
Other rebel leaders are also calling for drastic measures like banning Tawergha natives from ever working, living or sending their children to schools in Misrata.


http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304887904576395143328336026.html
 
Has there ever been a civil war without atrocities?

The BBC has reported this evening that the pretence that the West's bombing is just to protect civilians is recognised as nonsense in Libya, but the rebels welcome it, knowing that they couldn't win without NATO.

Our rulers send Tommy Atkins to Afghanistan to have his bits blown off in a futile campaign to prevent the re-establishment of Taliban rule. At the same time, they send Tommy's counterpart in the RAF to bomb the shit out of Tripoli in order to help the anti-Gaddafi rebels conquer Libya.

It is not entirely clear (at least to me) what the balance of forces is within the rebel camp, but we do know two things. There are Islamists among the rebels, including some treacherous al-Q types who have already bumped off a prominent rebel leader who was not to their liking, and in other countries in North Africa from Egypt to Morocco, Islamism is strong. In both Egypt and Tunisia, Islamists are by far the biggest movements.

Every time I see Libyan rebels on the telly, they are screaming "Allahu akbar!" We could try telling ourselves that's just a bit of religious bollocks shouted by fighters to give themselves courage, but given the balance of forces across the region, and not having seen any report that suggests the situation will be very different in Libya, I see no reason to hope that post-Gaddafi Libya will be an improvement.

We are ruled by fools - confused bloody fools, hurling high explosives!
 
You forgot to quote these bits from that article, which paints a bit of a different picture.
The hatred of Tawergha stems from witnesses who say loyalist soldiers were accompanied by hundreds of volunteer fighters from Tawergha when they ransacked and burned dozens of properties in an assault against Misrata and surrounding areas on March 16 to 18.
There are also accounts of rape, with one rebel commander putting the number at more than 150, but they are harder to prove given the stigma attached to the crime in the conservative muslim nationand the lack of testimony.

Bashir Amer says he was one of the victims of the assault on Misrata by loyalist soldiers and Tawerghans in March. Nothing was spared on his ranch, he said, in the farmland area of Tuminah on the road between Misrata and Tawergha.
The carcass of one of Mr. Amer's Thoroughbred horses was still baking in the sun during a recent visit. His farmhouse was set on fire after all valuables were looted, Mr. Amer said as he held up his wife's empty jewelry box. He stood in the master bedroom, which was reduced to incinerated walls and a carpet of ash.
Mr. Amer said he was having breakfast with his family when soldiers jumped over the farm's fence and started shooting indiscriminately, wounding his daughter Fatima, 16, in the leg.
Mr. Amer said they were then allowed to go to his parents' ranch farther up the road in nearby Karzaz opening the way for pro-Gadhafi volunteers from Tawergha, who eventually reached his parents' farm. There, he said all were led out before the house, like his own, was looted and set on fire. "It was terrifying when the Tawergha men came into my parents' house," Mr. Amer said.
His father and six cousins and their families were detained during the same raid on Tuminah and Karzaz. They remain missing along with more than 1,000 other Misrata residents.

not really surprising if the people who carried out these actions are now fleeing with their families. Not that I'd condone revenge attacks, but it's a lot more understandable that people might feel this way, and particularly that they wouldn't want these people to continue to live within a few miles of the places they'd recently been raping and pillaging alongside Gadhafis forces.

Must admit though that I'd been presuming the claims were referring to the evacuation of black migrant workers, and wasn't really aware of this situation, so thanks for the link.
 
You forgot to quote these bits from that article, which paints a bit of a different picture.

not really surprising if the people who carried out these actions are now fleeing with their families. Not that I'd condone revenge attacks, but it's a lot more understandable that people might feel this way, and particularly that they wouldn't want these people to continue to live within a few miles of the places they'd recently been raping and pillaging alongside Gadhafis forces.

Must admit though that I'd been presuming the claims were referring to the evacuation of black migrant workers, and wasn't really aware of this situation, so thanks for the link.
Yes, these are black Libyans who are regime loyalists.The article makes it clear that long standing racist attitudes have been exacerbated by the conflict. Yes, groups such as the Tawergha sided with the regime BECAUSE ITS A CIVIL WAR. (though I am extremely suspicious of claims of mass rape. Not least because we have heard that bollocks before but also because it chimes with a racist black men raping our women narrative. )This is a conflict of a divided population, something i have been claiming (and you have been dismissing) since it started. You want to paint a picture of a united population facing an hated and isolated regime ruling by brute force alone when the reality is that the regime enjoys considerable support. The Tawergha are an example of that.

I have always argued that atrocities are being committed by both sides. It is you who are denying this by denying this is true of the rebels. But your point begs the question. If collective punishment and revenge are understandable in this case because of the regions previous support for Gaddafi, (and yes, regime atrocities) the same also applies to every other previously loyal area of the country. There is always a "reason" for atrocities especially during a conflict as bitter and brutal as civil war.
 
It's gone. As we said before, and others doubted - get near tripoli and they'll do it themselves. The working class now have to fight the rebels.
 
Back
Top Bottom