Skip to main content

Today we will examine an embarrassing case in which Qaddafi backers get so busy fabricating stories that their web of deception develops logical contradictions that expose the whole illusion. This happens when incompatible stories denying Qaddafi's use of aircraft against unarmed protesters in February are examined side by side as we will do below.

No doubt these air attacks played a substantial role in earning Qaddafi and his son ICC arrest warrants this week:

Today, 27 June 2011, Pre-Trial Chamber I of the International Criminal Court (ICC) issued three warrants of arrest respectively for Muammar Mohammed Abu Minyar Gaddafi, Saif Al-Islam Gaddafi and Abdullah Al-Senussi for crimes against humanity (murder and persecution) allegedly committed across Libya from 15 February 2011 until at least 28 February 2011, through the State apparatus and Security Forces.

Almost from the being of the Arab uprising in Libya, Qaddafi met the peaceful protesters with maximum violence. By 21 February, he was already using war planes against demonstrations in Tripoli and Benghazi. It was specifically his use of jets and helicopters against the people, a step not yet taken in Bahrain, Yemen or Syria, that earned him a "No Fly Zone."

Death from above is hideous stuff so naturally Qaddafi apologists have had to refute the stubborn fact that Qaddafi used war planes on his own people. To the rescue came the Russian military with the following story:

“Airstrikes in Libya did not take place” – Russian military
Published: 01 March, 2011, 18:24

The reports of Libya mobilizing its air force against its own people spread quickly around the world. However, Russia's military chiefs say they have been monitoring from space – and the pictures tell a different story.

According to Al Jazeera and BBC, on February 22 Libyan government inflicted airstrikes on Benghazi – the country’s largest city – and on the capital Tripoli. However, the Russian military, monitoring the unrest via satellite from the very beginning, says nothing of the sort was going on on the ground.

At this point, the Russian military is saying that, as far as they are concerned, the attacks some media were reporting have never occurred.


All those who supported Qaddafi took this as proof that the people who said they were bombed by Qaddafi's planes were just lying. Activists who wouldn't believe a word coming out of the Pentagon took this report from the pro-Qaddafi, Russian military as gold. This story has been cited all over the Internet as proof that the stories about planes and helicopters is just so much western demonization of the Libyan leader.

For example Information Clearing House ran with Did Gaddaffi Bomb His Own People? NO! and this video:

So as long as you believe the Russian military and trust what they report, the Libyans didn't carry out any air strikes of any sort, so obviously they didn't bomb any protesters, right?

Problem is Saif Qaddafi, Mummar's son, had a different story. He said the war planes were only bombing ammo dumps so they wouldn't fall into the hands of protesters.
in Reuters Mon, Feb 21 18:51 PM EST:

Residents reported gunfire in parts of Tripoli and one political activist said warplanes had bombed the city. But state TV showed government supporters rallying and Qaddafi's son Saif al-Islam Qaddafi said warplanes had hit only ammunition dumps.

YaLibnan had a little more detail:
There are also reports that warplanes have bombed parts of the city, and helicopters carrying armed African mercenaries have landed in the streets.

But Qaddafi son, Saif al-Islam Qaddafi, said warplanes had hit only ammunition dumps.

He did not say why jets had carried out the air strikes, but on Sunday he accused protesters of raiding ammunition depots in the eastern city of Benghazi.


You can hear Saif Qaddafi make the same claim in English and his own voice at ~01:18 of this YouTube video I made and uploaded on the last day of February.

So if the much touted Russian observers didn't see the ammo dumps being bombed, they wouldn't have seen the demonstrators being bombed either, so their report is worthless.

As for Saif Qaddafi, we already know his testimony is worthless.

This is the kind of 'stuff' that the pro-Qaddafi people use to sow confusion and attempt to deny the Libyan freedom movement the support it deserves.



In The Final Call, June 7, 2011, Bill Fletcher, Jr. asks "Why Isn't Bahrain Being Bombed?" We hear many rhetorical renderings of this concerning Bahrain & Yemen among anti-imperialists lately.

The problem with this question as agitation is that it speaks exclusively to the choir. It is convincing only to those who already know that Bahrain isn't being bombed because it is a NATO protectorate, because of the fleet and the Saudis, etc.

Otherwise, if one approaches his question as a neutral observer with a good grasp of the details, one might say that Bahrain isn't being bombed because Bahrain hasn't attacked protester from the air and so hasn't provided the excuse for imposing a 'non-fly' zone that would make bombing Bahrain 'legal.' If you are not wearing blinders, you could conclude that and leave it at that because that is the bottom-line.

It is absolutely true that with Saudi help Bahrain has imposed a very brutal crackdown on freedom fighters there. Many have been murdered while NATO has looked the other way. This is true. But I have not heard that Bahrain was using aircraft to attack demonstrators. They have yet to cross that line, and the same could be said about Yemen and Syria as far as I know.

So even if there were forces in the UN that wanted to bomb Bahrain and had the clout to push it through, what would be their rational?

We know the road that has led to bombing Libya. It was legalized by the "no fly zone." DefSec Gates had already put the UN on notice that a vote for the "no-fly zone" was a vote for bombing Libya and when they brought in Article 4, just about anything became 'legal.' NATO had all the excuse it needed to rummage around in the internal affairs of an oil rich country in North Africa.

What opened the door to all of this was Qaddafi's use of jets and helicopters on his own people. That allowed the demand for a non-fly zone to gain enough traction, even with the Arab League, to get through the Security Council and that was all the cover the NATO interventionists needed. Game on.

The anti-Qaddafi forces are often blamed for bringing NATO into this fight. IMHO the blame resides with Qaddafi. He elected to deal with what began as peaceful opposition by increasingly violent means. When he started using aircraft he crossed a line that gave NATO an opening. After that it's like calling the police. sometimes you have to call them. Problem is they always arrive with their own agenda.



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:
'Brother' Qaddafi Indicted plus Libya & Syria: Dueling Rally Photofinishs
An Open Letter to ANSWER
ANSWER answers me
No Libyans allowed at ANSWER Libya Forum
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
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!

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
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

  •  Tip Jar (7+ / 0-)

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

    by Clay Claiborne on Fri Jul 01, 2011 at 10:08:48 AM PDT

  •  The Final Call? Ugh, Farrakhan's Qadaffi apologism (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Pozzo, yaque, blue book

    has been especially shameful.

    He compared Qadaffi's dictatorship to a "forceful parent", called Obama the "The First Jewish President" for supporting the no-fly zone, and mourned Mubarak's demise. Didn't run for the fact that Qaddafi's given him millions over the years and a "Gaddafi International Prize for Human Rights", hell he bragged about it.

    It shows how irrelevant he is now. He's just another old rich power-hungry man helping out other old rich power-hungry men. "Black Muslim" used to be synomonous with "Nation of Islam follower", but now Sunni Islam run thangs. Because everybody else found out what Malcolm did - the NOI teaches things that would be pure unforgivable blasphemy to every other branch of Islam.

    "See? I'm not a racist! I have a black friend!"

    by TheHalfrican on Fri Jul 01, 2011 at 10:31:39 AM PDT

  •  heh? (0+ / 0-)

    The RT Video you posted at around the 0:45sec mark talks about alleged bombings that took place on the 22nd of February but you try to debunk that with an article and a quote from Feb 21.
    Obviously these are too different events.

    •  further . . . (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      drawingporno

      the Russian source does not seem to be saying that bombing did not occur (as alleged by the diarist), but rather that the allegged bombing of "civilian protestors" did not occur . . . anyone killed when an ammunition dump is bombed is neither "civilian" nor (merely) a "protestor".  NATO kills its share of "civilians" when it bombs (allegedly military) targets . . . should NATO be charged with "war crimes"?  One might add that NATO is clearly the aggressor in this conflict . . . whatever its stated "motivations", its warplanes are operating clearly outside their own national borders.

      Fake Left, Drive Right . . . not my idea of a Democrat . . .

      by Deward Hastings on Fri Jul 01, 2011 at 10:46:08 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  NATO was invited in by Libyans. They begged. (7+ / 0-)

        Because Gaddafi was massacring the Libyan people.

        I am not a supporter of violent intervention. Still, we need to keep things straight. If the people were begging for the military support and the world responds, we can't really call those who come to help "the aggressors".

        •  I thought (0+ / 0-)

          The guys murdering the civilian protestors were "the agressors" here.

        •  which Libyans? (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          drawingporno

          Who sent this alleged "invitation"?  When was the vote?

          You might as well say "The Americans hate Obama" . . . since we can certainly find many who do.

          Fake Left, Drive Right . . . not my idea of a Democrat . . .

          by Deward Hastings on Fri Jul 01, 2011 at 01:02:19 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  alleged invitation (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Clay Claiborne, petral

            "Who sent this alleged invitation?"

            As Moammar Gadhafi's forces make their way toward Libyan rebel stronghold Benghazi, the situation in the city is getting tenser by the moment, reports the BBC. A spokesman for the rebels' council says there will be a "massacre" if the international community fails to intervene. Gadhafi will "kill civilians, he will kill dreams, he will destroy us," he said. "It will be on the international community's conscience." Libya's ambassador to the UN—who has defected from the Gadhafi regime—warns that "we will see a real genocide if the international community does not act quickly."

            The International Committee of the Red Cross, fearing an imminent attack, has withdrawn from Benghazi and moved its staff to the eastern city of Tobruk. The Libyan Red Crescent has been left with supplies for some 15,000 people. "We are extremely concerned about what will happen to civilians, the sick and wounded, detainees and others who are entitled to protection in times of conflict," said a Red Cross spokesman. (emphasis added)

            Link

      •  The Russian source "seems to be saying" (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        yaque, blue book, petral

        “Airstrikes in Libya did not take place” – Russian military
        In fact that was the Russia Today headline.

        And nowhere in the body did it say "well, there were these strikes against ammo dumps but as far as we can tell from space, no civilians were injured." No their statement was categorical. Please read it again.

        I'm going to assume you don't agree with outside forces arming civilians went they are attacked by their own military. From your statement 'anyone killed when an ammunition dump is bombed is neither "civilian" nor (merely) a "protestor"' it sounds like they also don't have the right to arm themselves from the supplies of the military that is attacking them either.

        What is a civilian to do when faced with the likes of Qaddafi besides rollover and die?

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

        by Clay Claiborne on Fri Jul 01, 2011 at 11:23:18 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Would it be OK with you (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          drawingporno

          if some militia in Texas were to raid a National Guard armory to get weapons to declare their independence from the Government in Washington or to defend themselves against Obama ? ? ?

          If not why not?

          Fake Left, Drive Right . . . not my idea of a Democrat . . .

          by Deward Hastings on Fri Jul 01, 2011 at 01:06:36 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  No! (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            petral, mythatsme

            That would be a reactionary attempt by a small minority to overthrow an elected government without even attempting change by peaceful means first. and in your scenario, they would be initiating the violence.

            As opposed to what we have in Libya, in which protesters representing an overwhelming majority sentiment for change in Libya, were massacred by a 42 year old dictatorship and then took up arms to defend themselves.  

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

            by Clay Claiborne on Fri Jul 01, 2011 at 02:49:19 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  You are wrong (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      blue book, petral

      I am debunking the Russian military report that "the very beginning, says nothing of the sort was going on" so it doesn't matter when the bombings of the ammo dumps took place, the Russian military report covers that period and it doesn't even acknowledge them.

      Besides, the RT report is dated March 1 and Saif Qaddafi says the same thing, in this own words on February 28 in the video I just added.

      Besides which Feb 21 18:51 PM EST was Feb 22 in Tripoli.

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

      by Clay Claiborne on Fri Jul 01, 2011 at 11:05:45 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  that's not what you said (0+ / 0-)

        and you are grasping at straws.

        Besides which Feb 21 18:51 PM EST was Feb 22 in Tripoli.

        And this quote just sealed it for me.

        FYI 18:51 EST is 51min pat midnight in Tripoli which makes your claim ridiculous to say the least unless, bombings occured -or not- and both RT and Reuters had time to verify and file stories, including an interview with K-Junior, in 51 minutes!!!!!

        Anyway, my point is don't weaken your arguments with exaggerations and/or dubious or false info.

    •  I still don't get your complaint. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      blue book

      I'm not arguing that Qaddafi only bombed protesters once. Say they are two different events, say the Reuters article refers to a bombing that took place on the 21st or earlier and the RT video refers to a separate bombing that took place on the 22nd.

      So what?

      Siaf Qaddafi's claim that they only bombed ammo dumps in the Reuters article obliviously refers a bombing that has already taken place.

      But his repetition of this claim to Amanpour later can be taken to cover both air strikes by saying that the only bombing they have done has been on ammo dumps.

      This directly contradicts the Russian report of March 1, that claims to cover a period from the beginning of the conflict and states that there were no air strikes period.  

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

      by Clay Claiborne on Fri Jul 01, 2011 at 12:57:21 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site