Skip to main content

View Diary: Libya: First National Elections in Nearly Half a Century. (74 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Actually, the rebel leaders cannot run. (0+ / 0-)

    Under the elections laws the NTC drew up, the rebel leadership banned themselves from this round of elections, for the good of the country and the legitimacy of the electoral process.

    This is the sort of thing someone who is opining about the legitimacy of elections should know.

    Art is the handmaid of human good.

    by joe from Lowell on Sun Jul 08, 2012 at 12:57:16 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  A liberal alliance led by a former Libyan rebel... (0+ / 0-)

      says it wins most seats.

      http://www.usatoday.com/...

      What they banned were the acting NTC members. So who ran were their allies and other rebel leaders who were not in the NTC.

      What was also banned was anyone who was not of the professional class, and mostly anyone who had any role in government in the last 40 years, unless they had "changed sides and joined the rebels". And of course, also banned was anyone who says anything which “insults the aims of the February 17 revolution," or "glorifies the former regime".

      And of course, any other wrong-think types that oppose the rebel groups and was not just banned outright, could be disappeared easily enough through the rebels' mass campaign of arbitrary arrests and detentions, and be tortured, or just murdered... for the good of the country.

      As I said before, what you have here is, at best, a kind of primary election where only those of approved ideology and allegiance may apply. Or, in other words, what would be called a fraudulent sham election in any other country.

      •  Yep, they were clearly the most popular. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Lawrence

        The did quite well in Sirte, too, which had very high turnout, as did the country as a whole.

        Demonstrating that the old Gadhaffi supporters that, clearly, matter the most to you don't agree with you about the legitimacy of the elections.  There was no boycott of the vote among those communities, the way there was among, for instance, Saddam's Sunni supporters in the 2005 Iraqi vote.

        Perhaps they just need a westerner with a poor grasp of the facts on the ground but the correct ideological orientation to explain to them why they're wrong.

        Art is the handmaid of human good.

        by joe from Lowell on Sun Jul 08, 2012 at 04:21:07 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  You know, you're funny. You never back up... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Lawrence

        any of your claims about Libyan public opinion, political conditions, or events with any evidence, and yet no matter how strong the evidence on the other side is - polls, election results, crowd sizes, whatever - you're all ready with a line of patter about why the evidence isn't good enough, so we should just take your word for it about how Libyans really feel, and how the elections really went.

        Art is the handmaid of human good.

        by joe from Lowell on Sun Jul 08, 2012 at 04:24:35 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  My "claims" are just facts (0+ / 0-)

          The "election" is a fraud. Elections in Zimbabwe and Cuba are far more free and fair by any standard. Yet here we are supposed to get all teary eyed and, conveniently, pat ourselves on the back for supporting the  bloodbath/humanitarian intervention that led to this wonderful event taking place.

          "The evidence" you speak of is a pile of non-evidence: "Polls", "election results" and "crowd sizes".

          By "polls" you mean a single bogus poll done by Bengazi University students that conveniently "found" that essentially everyone in Libya agrees with the Benghazi rebels, and that 81% of Libyans "totally trust" the NTC!  Gee whiz, I'm such a stupid, ideological meanie for doubting this so-called "evidence". What other explanation could there be?

          The "evidence" of "election results" here is also non-evidence, because this is not an election. It's a sham election in which only one side can run, and anyone that side doesn't like is officially banned or unofficially disappeared. And "crowd sizes" can't tell us much of anything.

          I don't care about this supposed "evidence" because it's mostly a tissue of lies like the whole intervention to begin with and it has no meaning. This is a fraudulent show election, giving Libyans a choice between Romney or Gingrich, Gingrich or Santorum, etc., and pretending this amounts to real choice and a democratic election, to a large extent to fool gullible folks like you into congratulating yourself.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site