Skip to main content

Former congresswomen and Green Party presidential candidate has just returned from a fact finding mission to Libya. While there she talked [YouTube 03:31] with a Qaddafi supporter in the hospital after being injured by US/NATO bombing. He said "People in Germany have Hitler. People in Italy have Mussolini. It does not matter if they are good or not; they have [a] hero. Why [not] let us have [a] hero? We like him [Qaddafi]." McKinney responded "yeah, right."

The ANSWER Coalition sponsored nationwide speaking tour of Cynthia McKinney: Eyewitness Libya started in Los Angeles on Saturday, 18 June 2011. This was at the Immanuel Presbyterian Church on Wilshire where many progressive events take place. Almost two hundred people showed up. Among them was a group of about two dozen Libyans and Libyan-Americans, some of which clearly associated themselves with the Free Libya movement, the tricolor flag of the Libyan opposition was much in evidence not only as flags but as hats, scarfs and jackets. All these Libyans were clearly anti-Qaddafi.

While the Libyans said they had liked Cynthia McKinney in the past, especially her work in support of Gaza, they were here to set her straight about Qaddafi and Libya. I had seen some of these Libyan activists before, at the first LA rallies in support the uprisings in Tunisia and Egypt. This was before ANSWER took up those struggles.

I didn't see any pro-Qaddafi Libyans that evening, either outside or inside the church. No Libyans were on the program and the green flag of Qaddafi's Libya was nowhere to be seen. If there were any pro-Qaddafi Libyans in attendance, they never revealed themselves. As far as I could make out, all of the pro-Qaddafi people in attendance, including Cynthia McKinney, were non-Libyans and all the Libyans who showed up were anti-Qaddafi.

So ANSWER showed them how we do public forums in the land of the free and the home of the brave. They excluded the Libyans from the Libya Forum! Not only did ANSWER tell them that they would not be allowed to pay their $10 and attend the event, a line of ANSWER people formed a human wall to divide the sidewalk between and us and them. When I exclaimed "They're keeping the Libyans out of the Libya Forum." one of the ANSWER people forming the wall told me "We're not keeping them out because they are Libyan. We're keeping them out because they support the intervention." This left me contemplating which was the worst reason for keeping people out? Keeping them out because of their nationality or keeping them out because of views contrary to those of the forum organizers? Of course, opposing NATO's intervention is a very easy and moral position to take for those that have lost no family to Qaddafi and didn't stand to lose any no matter how many Graf missiles and cluster munitions he was given free reign to use on cities under siege like Benghazi and Misrata. They have nothing to lose by keeping their hands cleanly in their pockets and taking the moral high ground.

Inside the forum a number of other people spoke before Cynthia McKinney. All, including her, lauded "brother Qaddafi." They liked to focus on the Pan-African and anti-imperialist reputation he cultivated in the 1980's and before. None talked about the changes since 2004. Nobody mentioned the military-to-military relations he was cultivating with the Bush Pentagon, his use of the "Prince of Darkness" Richard Perle as a consultant, his ties to Goldman-Sacks, etc. Even Fidel Castro recognized this new Qaddafi, noting before the NATO intervention ["NATO's Inevitable War" on-line at CubaDebate, March 4]:

"it is an undeniable fact that the relations between the US and its NATO allies with Libya in the recent years were excellent," adding that Libya "opened up strategic sectors as the production and distribution of oil to foreign investment" and that "many state-owned companies were privatized. The IMF played its role in implementing these policies." ... "Aznar was full of praise for Qaddafi, and he was followed by Blair, Berlusconi, Sarkozy, Zapatero, and even my friend the King of Spain; they all queued up under the mocking smile of the Libyan leader. They were pleased... I simply ask why they now want to invade Libya and send Qaddafi to the International Criminal Court at The Hague?"

The reason, Mr. Castro, is that they realize, even if you don't, that the Libyan people have finally lost all fear of Qaddafi. He cannot survive, he will he done as soon as his money runs out. His dictatorship is done and NATO has in the last hour thrown him under the bus to help their play for a future role in Libya.

Cynthia McKinney and ANSWER say nothing of this, just as they say nothing of the more than seven thousand Libyans that the opposition says that Qaddafi has killed. Later in San Francisco, McKinney puts the total number killed at "four thousand and some dead".. "but of course the bulk of that would have to come from the NATO bombing because they're using bunker buster bombs." [YouTube 07:15] For his part, Qaddafi claims that about eight hundred civilians have been killed by NATO bombs but there are many reasons for questioning even that number.

For example there was that embarrassing incident a couple of weeks ago when Libya officials took foreign reporters to a hospital to view a baby girl they said was injured in a NATO air strike. The whole fraud unraveled after a hospital workers passed a reporter a note saying the girl had been injured in an automobile accident. Latter some of the reporters spotted the "concerned uncle" at another Qaddafi dog and pony show and he was forced to admit that he worked for the Libyan government. The "Kuwait baby incubator" fraud comes to mind only this time NATO is the victim, not the perpetrator.

Fidel Castro may support Qaddafi but he knows that the uprising in Libya is part of the Arab Spring and flows from the real concerns of the people, saying "Without any doubt, the faces of the young people who were protesting in Benghazi, men, and women wearing the veil or without the veil, were expressing genuine indignation."

After decades of living under brutal dictators and being exploited by their imperialist masters, the people rose up, first in North Africa and then in the broader Middle-East. Peaceful protests against Qaddafi were already developing in Libya in the middle of January as Ben Ali was being thrown out of power in neighboring Tunisia. They were spurred on my the ouster of Mubarak in their eastern neighbor, Egypt, less than a month latter.

The causes for the uprising in Libya have been essentially the same as they have been throughout the whole region, beginning with rising food prices and growing unemployment and ending with fearless rejection of long established dictators. The people rising up in Libya have been largely working class, as they have been in Egypt and Tunisia. But there have been differences. In Tunisia and Egypt, the people were able to throw out dictators that had ruled for 20 or 30 years quickly and with relatively little bloodshed because the army refused to open fire on peaceful protesters. In Libya they did not refuse such orders. Eventually the protesters took up arms and started fighting back. The uprising became a civil war.

But that's not how ANSWER sees things. Since they missed the non-violent phase of the Libyan opposition, to them it never existed. They see the rebels as the same as contras. They are all paid agents of NATO, tools of imperialism, etc. They weren't paying attention until the UN and NATO got involved. They didn't express any public support for the uprising in Tunisia until after Ben Ali had been ousted. They didn't support the uprising in Egypt until 29 January. Compare that to the hacker group Anonymous, which started OpTunisia on 2 January and OpEgypt on 23 January. When it comes to Yemen and Bahrain, ANSWER has spoken out in support of the uprisings and against the repressive, US backed regimes. But when it comes to Libya and Syria, with their "anti-imperialist" dictators Qaddafi and Assad, it's a different story.

In those countries they don't support the Arab uprisings. In fact, they don't even recognize those struggles as part of the Arab uprising. Because those leaders have a reputation for opposing NATO, they support the government violence and act like the people have no right to rebel. Whatever NATO is for, they are against. Whatever NATO is against, they are for. That is the western centric way they view the world. In this perverse way, they tail after their own bourgeoisie. They don't support the people's revolutionary struggles in a steadfast way.

The Party for Socialism and Liberation [PSL] which leads ANSWER, made this point crystal clear in a recent proclamation:

Western powers bring death and destruction, nothing else. This must be a starting point for activists located in the United States and Europe when it comes to the Libyan revolt.

Ultimately the problem PSL will have with their starting point is that they can't lead by taking a reaction as their starting point.

An alternate starting point might be "steadfast support for the people's revolutionary movements irregardless of stand taken or pretended by the US." That is a starting point that doesn't have to wait for and react to what the Western powers do. That is a starting point that demands our attention and support as soon as a people act to liberation themselves. That is also a starting point that requires that we have an organic connection to those movements. It is a starting point that demands that we take the focus off of ourselves and what our government is doing about it.

Another Libyan, commenting on a similar Cynthia McKinney video presentation noted this "all about us" attitude that runs through much of the ANSWER type opposition to the war in Libya. I think he put it well:

These questions don't occur to McKinney as she goes on to state that the United States is "a poor trumpet" for democracy because of its own legacy of oppression, from "genocide of indigenous Americans to enslavement of stolen Africans to disfranchisement of women..." This, ironically, is just a perverse form of patriotism. For McKinney, the whole question is about America [my bold]—certainly not about the Libyans, who deserve democracy entirely apart from the United States' moral credibility to advocate for such. This is a cynical and dishonest distraction of the lowest order.

And that, finally, is why the Libyans had been excluded from the Libyan forum. It really wasn't about them.

Whereas Castro sees an attempt to subvert a revolution, "Imperialism and NATO – seriously concerned by the revolutionary wave unleashed in the Arab world, where a large part of the oil is generated that sustains the consumer economy of the developed and rich countries – could not help but take advantage of the internal conflict arising in Libya so that they could promote military intervention."; they see the Libyan uprising as CIA/NATO intrigue from top to bottom. Perhaps it is this simplistic view that leads them to abusing Libyans who attempt to attend their Libya forums.

After Cynthia McKinney spoke she showed a film they had made in Libya. The core of it was one bloody scene after another showing what NATO ordinance had done to Libya soldiers; missing were the women and children that should have been very prominent if indeed 800 civilians have been killed in the bombing. The Qaddafi government clearly was providing the visuals for this film and dead children would have been high on the list if they had any at that time.

In the Q&A that followed, it became clear that at least one Libyan had gotten in and he was against Qaddafi. He was booed.

Cynthia McKinney has been a little vague about who paid for this trip. She said that when she was in Tripoli earlier she decided that she wanted to return with others on a truth telling mission. She was able to borrow the $25,000 cost from an unnamed friend, who "I have to pay back." Hence the collection at the door and the latter passing of the plate. While it is pretty clear that this friend with 25 grand to spare is also a Qaddafi supporter, since we don't know who he is, we can't know what political and economic ties he may have to Qaddafi. This raises a lot of questions about the whole trip and tour. In any case, it's too bad they didn't let the Libyans in. She could have been a couple hundred dollars closer to her goal.

San Francisco was Tuesday. San Francisco was different.

ANSWER didn't keep Libyan's out of the Cynthia McKinney Libya Forum in San Francisco on Tuesday 21 June but they had other ways of letting them know they weren't welcome. An ANSWER Coalition supporter told the Libyans to "go back home." [YouTube] When a Libya women became offended and said that she takes it very personally because most of these Libyans are exiles, she has family in Libya, she has an uncle in his prison and Qaddafi has killed three of her cousins, she is told my one person that if she takes it personally she should take it outside and my another to "grow up."

They also tried very hard to avoid calling on the Libyans in the Q&A. When they failed, it led to some interesting exchanges. When a Libyan man ask Cynthia McKinney why she made no mention of the over seven thousand Libyans killed by Qaddafi in suppressing the uprising, she responded that "it is the right of the Libyan people, in my opinion, to solve their problems among themselves without NATO bombs and missiles." [YouTube] That got a big round of applause from the ANSWER supporters.

As was pointed out in Arming Gaddafi, and other places, many of the weapons Qaddafi has been using against his own people have been supplied by NATO countries, but these aren't the NATO weapons that McKinney opposes. She hasn't objected to NATO countries selling Qaddafi millions of dollars in weapons, which he is now using to put down the rebellion, but she has been most vigorously objecting to NATO doing anything to right the balance. We all know that NATO is not a bunch of boy scouts, but the larger and more dangerous doctrine that Cynthia McKinney, ANSWER, and all the "non-interventionist" appear to advocate is that the international community has no right to set limits on the level of violence a state may use to put down uprisings within its borders. Syria, Yemen and Bahrain are all now expanding the reach of that doctrine with all it's frightful consequences.

She may not realized it but this stance she is taking with regards to Libya also justifies Israel's vicious suppression of Gaza, which she has so courageously opposed; because a necessary corollary to the thesis that the world has no right to interfere with what a state does within it's own borders is that the world has no right to tell a state what those borders are. Qaddafi understands the Gaza connection, that is why he uses the example of Israeli to justify his own actions, telling France24 "even the Israelis in Gaza, when they moved into the Gaza Strip, they moved in with tanks to fight such extremists. It's the same thing here!" He was referring to Operation Cast Lead, which Israel launched against the Gaza Strip two days after Christmas, 2008, killing at least 1,400 Palestinians. See Gaddafi: Crackdown modeled after Israel. Weeks before NATO started bombing, Qaddafi was carrying out a Israeli styled crackdown on the Libyan people and this is what Cynthia McKinney is demanding not be interfered with.

In response to another Libyan who managed to ask a question, Akbar Muhammad from the Nation of Islam said "The way I'm going to answer my Libyan brothers [is] there's a way to go about it. You could have called for a referendum. Look at when those African leaders came to Benghazi, the people in Benghazi ran them out, these African heads of state. Now if you really wanted to do it, you could tell America, if you want their help, say "What we want is a vote"... "Could you come in, instead of bombing, supervise a referendum, so that the Libya people could say if they want Mummar Qaddafi or some other Westminster democratic process." That got a laugh.

Of course he is in the United States, not Benghazi. He can talk about the Afro-American struggles and then tell the Libyans "your situation is not unique." He can arrogantly forget that a few days before NATO started enforcing the no-fly zone, Qaddafi told Benghazi "We will show no mercy..."

Remember the circumstance under which Muhammad is suggesting they should have called for a referendum. Qaddafi's forces had just flatten the small town to the west of Benghazi, killing hundreds with aircraft, tanks and artillery.  "The town of Ajdabiyah has been cleansed of mercenaries and terrorists linked to the al Qaeda organization," Libyan state TV bragged. Now Qaddafi was promising to "go house to house" and "kill the rats", meaning Libyans, in this city of almost a million. This was on the eve of the UN vote on resolution 1973. Libyan League for Human Rights chief Soliman Bouchuiguir, said that if Qaddafi was allowed to attack Benghazi there would be "a real bloodbath, a massacre like we saw in Rwanda." That is why the Arab League voted for intervention. That is why the first NATO air strikes were around Benghazi. Whatever their motivation, the NATO actions almost certainly did stop a bloodbath in Benghazi. This is an inconvenient truth for Qaddafi supporters.

But when you're not in a difficult situation it can be very easy to be judgmental.

I will tell you frankly that I don't like the police. I know that they have gotten away with murder too many times. I have seen them lie, torture and act like thugs. On a personal level, police have threatened to murder me and I have done time in jail because police lied on me. Still, if I happened to be threatened by gangsters or if my child is kidnapped, I will call the police.

And I don't think Ho Chi Minh was an imperialist tool because he allowed US OSS doctors to treat him or because he accepted US military help in his struggle against the Japanese.

However, I think it was absolutely shameful the way Stalin sent Molotov scurrying off to Washington to beg the United States to step up it's war against Hitler in 1942. Imagine that! A union of socialist republics demanding the US imperialists help them in their war with German imperialists by intervening militarily in a European affair. Didn't they know the US reputation for wantonly killing civilians, from the Indian wars or the Philippines for example? Shouldn't they have been able to anticipate the hell on Earth the US and British imperialists would create for the civilians of Dresden and some one thousand other German town and cities they incinerated in the final months of the war?

Of course, that was after the Hitler-Stalin pack broke down and Hitler invaded the USSR, before that [Daily Worker, 1940] it was "the Anglo-French Imperialist war machine."

UPDATE: How do Libyans in Tripoli feel about the NATO bombing of their city?

This video from LibyaResistance may give us a clue. The description reads:

In Tripoli, as Nato undertakes its most intense bombing of the campaign, locals come out to show their appreciation by cheering and whistling. Rooftops are full of people watching in appreciation. Later security roamed the streets shooting in the air to silence and intimidate… They should know by now.. Tripoli can never be silence

A comment reads:
@KernelThread We don't need to rebuild gaddafi's compound. In fact we need help to tear it down. His compound takes up tens of square kilometres and houses his own palaces and security. The OVERWHELMING consensus in tripoli is that we want it to be turned into a green park for EVERYONE to enjoy. So we will be tearing down the buildings anyway. The rest of civilian Tripoli is untouched by NATO. Compare it to gaddafis indiscriminate bombing of misrata - now THAT we need to rebuild!

Here are the links to my articles at WL Central:
2011-06-22 No Libyans allowed at ANSWER Libya Forum
2011-04-13 Doha summit supports Libyan rebels
Current Events in Libya
2011-03-11 Who's running Egypt?
Libyans are spilling their blood for us all!
 2011-02-24 Arming Gaddfi
 2011-02-14 Senior Egyptian army officers ordered massacre
 2011-02-13 Tales of Tyrants: Ben Ali, Mubarak & Suleiman
 2011-02-12 Algeria Protesters Defy Ban, Demand Change
 The Mubarak Screw Up & the Suleiman Danger
 2011-02-10 Mubarak is Defiant
 2011-02-10 Mubarak Expected to Step Down!
 2011-02-09 The Google Search for Wael Ghonim
 2011-02-08 The New Egyptian Normal: Thousands Demonstrate in Cairo, Alexandria
2011-02-06 Tunisia's Revolution Continues
2011-02-04 Tunisian Anonymous activists take on Egyptian cause
2011-02-04 Protesters roar back with "Day of Departure" for Mubarak
2011-02-03 Algerians plan Feb 12 protest against 19- year-long state of emergency
2011-02-01 Jordan's King Sacks Government as Protests Grow
2011-02-01 Tunisian Islamic Leader Returns as EU Freezes Ousted President's Assets
2011-02-01 Army Vows Not to Shoot as Protesters make Million Man Marches in Cairo, Alexandria Today [UPDATE: 2]
2011-01-30 Million Egyptian Protest Planned as Resistance Continues
2011-01-29 No Internet? No Problem! Anonymous Faxes Egypt
2011-01-28 In Jordan Thousands Demand New Government
2011-01-28 Mubarak Refuses to Step Down!
2011-01-28 Egypt is on Fire!
2011-01-27 Libya is in Revolt as Gaddafi Worries
2011-01-27 Algerians Plan Big Protest Rally for February 9th
2011-01-27 Tunisia Protests Continues as a Warrant is Issued for Ben Ali
2011-01-27 Tens of Thousands Rally in Yemen, Demand Change
2011-01-27 Mubarak Blinks as Egyptian Protests Continue for 3rd Day

North African Hacker Humor

Here is a recap of my other DKos dairies on the Internet, North Africa and Anonymous:
Are they throwing babies out of incubators yet?
Continuing Discussion with a Gaddafi Supporter
Boston Globe oped supports Gaddafi with fraudulent journalism
Doha summit supports Libyan rebels
Current Events in Libya
Who's running Egypt?
Amonpour Plays Softball with Gaddafi
Californians Support North African Revolts
Google Supports Revolts | Anonymous does too!
Secret U.S. Intelligence Source on Middle East Revealed !
Arming Gaddfi
Are "mutinous officers" are being executed in Egypt now?
Algeria's 19 year long State of Emergency to end soon, President says
Senior Egyptian Army Officers Ordered Massacre!
Tales of Tyrants: Ben Ali, Mubarak & Suleiman
UPDATE: Egypt's Mubarak Has Resigned! - The Mubarak Screw Up & the Suleiman Danger
BREAKING: Mubarak is Defiant
The Google Search for Wael Ghonim
Tunisia's Revolution Continues
Google Goes Rebel, Supports Egyptian Protest
Tunisian Anonymous activists take on Egyptian cause
Protesters roar back with "Day of Departure" for Mubarak
Act Now to Stop Mubarak's Thugs From Killing More! w Petition
Act Now to Stop Mubarak's Thugs From Killing More!
They Should Have Helped That Street Vendor
Million Egyptian Protest Planned as Resistance Continues
Huffington Post Disses the Jasmine Revolution Redux
No Internet? No Problem! Anonymous Faxes Egypt
Egypt is on Fire!
North African Revolution Continues
Egypt Protests Continue, Tunisia Wants Ben Ali Back
BREAKING: Protesters Plan Massive "Day of Wrath" in Egypt Today
Tunisians Thank Anonymous as North Africa Explodes
Huffington Post Disses the Jasmine Revolution
Tunisia: A Single Tweet Can Start A Prairie Fire!
Anonymous plans Op Swift Assist in Tunisia
Arrested Pirate Party Member Becomes Tunisian Minister
Is Libya Next? Anonymous Debates New Operation
Tunis: This Photo was Taken 66 Minutes Ago
The WikiLeaks Revolution: Anonymous Strikes Tunisia
EMERGENCY: DKos Must Act Now to Protect Tunisian Bloggers!

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  As soon as I saw McKinney's name (8+ / 0-)

    in your diary, I just sort of assumed the worst and gee, I was right.  The only person Cynthia cares about is Cynthia. She represents no one except herself.

    Nice to see the ANSWER Coalition make themselves completely irrelevant by embracing her.

    I can just about forgive the Brits for starting our revolutionary war and burning DC to the ground during the war of 1812 for giving us Led Zeppelin.

    by Pager on Thu Jun 23, 2011 at 10:24:11 AM PDT

  •  Hmm, I almost feel more confused about (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Rich in PA

    the situation after reading this diary than I did before reading it . . . .

    That's not a good thing, is it?

  •  ANSWER and McKinney have no credibility (6+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ferg, jj32, Meteor Blades, killjoy, petral, sirkarl

    amongst sane people, and haven't for some time.

    Why go through so much work to discredit these clowns?

    "[R]ather high-minded, if not a bit self-referential"--The Washington Post.

    by Geekesque on Thu Jun 23, 2011 at 10:30:04 AM PDT

  •  Don't know what her or ANSWER's true (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    shaharazade, aliasalias, joanneleon

    motivations are but let's be clear all people against this agressive NATO action aren't necessarily non or anti-interventionists or isolationists.  It's just that they see this for what it is and know the humanitarian aspect is another false excuse to continue the hegemomic rampage thru the Middle East and North Africa. And that's not saying humanitarian assistance isn't needed by many Libyan people.  It's a tough thing when the paramedics are also the gangs.

    S.A.W. 2011 STOP ALL WARS "The Global War on Terror is a fabrication to justify imperialism."

    by BigAlinWashSt on Thu Jun 23, 2011 at 10:42:40 AM PDT

    •  "It's a tough thing when the paramedics are also (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      the gangs."

      That sounds like the LAPD but that's the real world.

      Remember history, Clay Claiborne, Director Vietnam: American Holocaust - narrated by Martin Sheen

      by Clay Claiborne on Thu Jun 23, 2011 at 10:55:20 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  The U.S. uses dictators to expand hegemony (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Pete Rock, Athenian

      Bush was already rehabilitating Gaddafi, trying to escort him back into the international community, get him to be one of our guys, like the Saudis. The Libyan intervention started with absolutely no guarantees that it would end up with an American- or business-friendly government; from an American perspective, it's doing nothing but increasing uncertainty and temporarily hobbling the oil industry.

      Libya isn't Iraq; Iraq was incapable of developing its oil fields fast enough, and the oil companies desperately wanted in. But there was no such problem in Libya; Gaddafi was allowing oil companies to drill to their hearts' content.

      This war just doesn't fit into the mold that people seem to be trying to force it into. It's telling that ANSWER apparently couldn't find any Libyans to support their position so they had to shut Libyans out altogether.

      •  Why would you think the neocons such as Kristol, (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        shaharazade, aliasalias

        Wolfowicz, Abrams, Krauthammer, Leiberman and McCain, those that helped bring us the Iraq war and who have been after Libya for a long time, are so supportive of this action?  For humanitarian reasons?  That's just not possible.

        S.A.W. 2011 STOP ALL WARS "The Global War on Terror is a fabrication to justify imperialism."

        by BigAlinWashSt on Thu Jun 23, 2011 at 11:18:11 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  If you like a lot of war... (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          petral, Athenian, stevelu

'll probably like a little war too. I don't expect Kristol et al to be too happy with the decision to turn around and walk away when Gaddafi loses his grip (if indeed it happens this way).

          Contrary to a lot of what I've been reading, this is actually coming closer every day. The rebels have regained their momentum and are advancing again; Gaddafi's army is still embargoed and is running out of fuel and losing military units by the day, such that he will probably not be able to hold Tripoli when the time comes. And then NATO's role is officially over.

          My opinions on foreign policy are not just "the opposite of what Bill Kristol says" even if it usually lines up that way.

      •  It was a bi-partisan effort... (0+ / 0-)

        Bush sent Biden on Air Force 2 to kiss Qaddafi's ring and bring him back into the fold.

        Remember history, Clay Claiborne, Director Vietnam: American Holocaust - narrated by Martin Sheen

        by Clay Claiborne on Thu Jun 23, 2011 at 11:20:37 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  I regard Americans with those politics (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      as selfhating.

      True, there is usually unhealed trauma that motivates the stance.

      But there is malice and bad faith and historical error in claiming that pro-democratic American intervention is invariably imperial in design or in consequence.  The American South, Germany/western Europe, and Japan/East Asia stand in cold  and undeniable disproof of the assertion.  (And yes, spare me the sophistry of the counter"argument".)

      That Gaddafi is a murderous hegemon and in league with most of  the remaining other murderous hegemons and empire projects around the world doesn't seem to faze this part of the American Left.  The approach and presuppositionism of it is well described in Hofstadter's Paranoid Style.

  •  Oh my -- "brother" Mubarak, (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    PhilJD, Geekesque, shaharazade, sirkarl

    "brother" Chalabi, "brother" Obiang are just ducky as long as long as those Americans sidling up to all those "brothers" (aka brutal dictators or wannabe dictators) are powerful?

    From a PR perspective, McKinney has two left feet.  Just because Gaddafi may not be the worst dictator in the world and shares more of Libya's natural resource wealth with Libyans than many others do, doesn't make him our "brother."  OTOH, if exiles from other countries who have made their home in the US had their way, most would demand that we take out the leadership in their previous home countries.  Remember the Bay of Pigs?


    •  One can be anti-NATO without being pro-Qaddafi (5+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      PhilJD, shaharazade, jj32, Pete Rock, Agathena

      And that is the correct position. In fact a number ANSWER supporters made exactly that point in conversations outside before the forum started in LA.

      "We're not pro-Qaddafi, we're anti-intervention"  I don't know how they felt inside latter when it was all "brother Qaddafi" this and "brother Qaddafi" that....and not one critique of Qaddafi was made.

      Remember history, Clay Claiborne, Director Vietnam: American Holocaust - narrated by Martin Sheen

      by Clay Claiborne on Thu Jun 23, 2011 at 11:13:22 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  That's what I said -- (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        and criticized McKinney for her "brother Qaddafi" line.  However, it doesn't bug me that criticizing Qaddafi was absent from a non-intervention in Libya forum.  It's not like anti-Qaddafi critiques and rhetoric haven't been common in this country for decades and been without any attempt at any balance.

  •  I warned my step-daughter... (8+ / 0-)

    ...(who is part of the Libya resistance abroad) to stay away from the ANSWER event. She and some of her friends decided on the basis of that disrecommendation not to go or there would have been more Libyans and Libyan-Americans turned away.

    Just more proof that ANSWER is one of the worst things to happen to the anti-imperialist movement.

    Don't tell me what you believe. Tell me what you do and I'll tell you what you believe.

    by Meteor Blades on Thu Jun 23, 2011 at 11:11:58 AM PDT

  •  ANSWER is a shill for rival (0+ / 0-)

    powers to the USA.  Just like the old Left's Communist Party used to loyally toe the PRAVDA line, and the Russians had their element represented thereby, and the Chinese Third World leadership alliance had its friendly Parties working with it, so does ANSWER.

    A group that has thousands to spend for political tourism for Cynthia McKinney would be something if it were truly independent, truly self supporting.

    But if a government appropriation or a foundation's philanthropic grant doesn't finance it, the PR department of a foreign state derpartment does.  That is how they stay around, with the money.  They probably have more than one big source, because they are useful to some extent to play in the politics at the edges.

    Good catch that ANSWER didn't even want any Libyans in its event unless they were associated with "Brother" Mummar.

    The Libyans have had no real politics and have lived under defacto martial law since Gaddafi toojk over in 1969.  Everything is new and unchartered territory for them, not to say difficult. In THEIR revolution.

    but that doesn't matter. What is important is that America's new tack opposing Gaddafi be opposed, and the Euro, Sino, Russian or private players be allowed to have the run of the place again. The US should be excluded no matter what. That is ANSWER's answer for everything.

    cast away illusions, prepare for struggle

    by Pete Rock on Thu Jun 23, 2011 at 12:52:24 PM PDT

    •  The major anti-NATO groups and sites (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      stevelu, Pete Rock

      have all kinds of obsessions with the post-Yugoslav countries, Georgia, Ukraine, and Poland.  Also with oil and gas pipelines and which company gets drillling rights where.  Curiously, Belarus and Russia's continuing occupation of East Prussia ("Kaliningrad Enclave")  and Karelia or the problems of 'Transdniestria' or Chechnya or the Northern Caucasus generally are never subjects of much contemplation or electronic ink expenditure by these folks.  Let alone analyzed in terms of imperialism.

      Makes you kind of wonder whether the money and information flows and encouraged rhetorical tropes to support these groups originate in Moscow, though.

      •  that's interesting, got any links ? /nt (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        The 21st Century begins, of all places, in N Africa, with simple courage. We've more resources & more to lose, but *everything* to gain. Rethink 'impossible' & let us risks together.

        by stevelu on Thu Jun 23, 2011 at 10:17:15 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Have a look at (0+ / 0-)

 for what might be the mother ship to a lot of other lesser websites with similar content.

          Compare the contents there to what you see over time in the English language translation of Pravda, at , and/or other Russian government mouthpiece media outlets.

  •  Well they're certainly not doing it... (0+ / 0-)
    The reason, Mr. Castro, is that they realize, even if you don't, that the Libyan people have finally lost all fear of Qaddafi. He cannot survive, he will he done as soon as his money runs out. His dictatorship is done and NATO has in the last hour thrown him under the bus to help their play for a future role in Libya.

    ... because they're a bunch of great humanitarians, otherwise they wouldn't have "bought in" in the first instance.  That having been said, the Libyan people will certainly be better off under whatever "rebel" regime takes power than they were under Gaddafi.

    "You must do what you feel is right, of course." Obi-Wan Kenobi, in Episode IV

    by Cassiodorus on Thu Jun 23, 2011 at 01:09:03 PM PDT

    •  It didn't end with Mubarak on the run, (0+ / 0-)

      just when you think its all over, It has only begun

      I tweeted this when Mubarak fell. Seen it retweeted since.

      Same story here. While I can't say getting rid of Qaddafi is the easy part, there are many more struggles for a free Libya after he is gone.

      Remember history, Clay Claiborne, Director Vietnam: American Holocaust - narrated by Martin Sheen

      by Clay Claiborne on Thu Jun 23, 2011 at 10:57:30 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  well done, clay claiborne (0+ / 0-)

    came to your diary via a twitter link.  there are a good number of libyan tweeps showing appreciation for your article and tweeting the link.  i haven't seen it the vid yet, but it seems that the mckinney presentation in chicago involved a strong anti-gaddafi presence.  what she and answer are doing is an embarrassment to this leftist.

    Brothers & sisters of #Egypt, you have given the world the most precious gift: the belief that ultimately right will prevail. -Desmond Tutu

    by conchita on Thu Jun 23, 2011 at 08:30:01 PM PDT

  •  A election/referendum now is a solution. (0+ / 0-)

    Don't keep dragging March into it.   Deal with the now.  Continued bombing, or ceasefire and referendum/election NOW.   What is the benefit of continued NATO bombing NOW?

    Also your quotes from March are out of context.  The "no mercy" quote was that there would be no mercy for armed rebels, not civilians -- he said people would have a chance to give up their weapons or to flee to Egypt.

    •  Yeah, like in Ajdabiyah (0+ / 0-)

      Besides he shows "no mercy" to the people of Misrata who he showers with cluster munitions and Raf missiles.

      Also he showed no mercy for the rebels before they armed themselves, that's why they armed themselves.

      Remember what has happening in Benghazi before the rebels had arms?

      Remember history, Clay Claiborne, Director Vietnam: American Holocaust - narrated by Martin Sheen

      by Clay Claiborne on Fri Jun 24, 2011 at 02:25:39 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Oh yeah (0+ / 0-)

    There has been plenty of talk about McKinney and ANSWER where I am this weekend.  

    This is my take -  I am against the Imperialistic actions of the US (and let's just accept that this is what is happening) but McKinney is a fraud and a  liar.  

    Remember how this was going to take days not weeks?  Remember how we said it wasn't about regime change but now it is?  It's Imperialism.  The Libyan people are NOT behind a western backed takeover of their country.

    I'd rather die than give you control ~ Trent Reznor

    by JustJennifer on Sat Jul 02, 2011 at 08:19:06 PM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site