Libya With Gaddafi

[WaLeEdK2]

Just thought this was an eye opening video.

 

[war&peace]

Qaddafi was a great leader and Muslims have to avenge his murder from NATO.

 

[WaLeEdK2]

Qaddafi was a great leader and Muslims have to avenge his murder from NATO.

In the Islamic Summit in Lahore 1974 he called Pakistan: The Fort of Islam. Indeed he was a great man as was King Faisal and others that were taken out by the CIA.

 

[war&peace]

In the Islamic Summit in Lahore 1974 he called Pakistan: The Fort of Islam. Indeed he was a great man as was King Faisal and others that were taken out by the CIA.

Yes that is true and ever wonder why Islamic countries have not been able to make a meaningful union, organisation other than a OIC which has been rendered useless after the systematic killing of our leader like ZAB, Qaddafi, King Faisal, and Yasir Arafat.

 

[Indika]

Just thought this was an eye opening video.

Well how can you have a discussion with out our "Jamahiriya" expert ? @jamahir

 

[gau8av]

@jamahir

 

[dilpakistani]

Well there must have been some kind on in justice he might have done ... which caused people to go against him

 

[Madali]

Qaddafi was a great leader and Muslims have to avenge his murder from NATO.

Avenge his murder? Muslims helped in attacking Libya. Here are the Muslim countries that publicly, officially, and directly attacked Libya: UAE, Turkey, Jordan, and Qatar.

The GCC strongly supported the action. The Arab League also gave a statement supporting the action.

There were a few Muslim countries that were against it. Pakistan was against it, "Peaceful political solution needs to be evolved by the Libyan people themselves in the spirit of mutual accommodation and national reconciliation.". Iran's President said, '"UN Should have sent mediators to Libya, not NATO Bombs" Indonesia called for a ceasefire. Bangladesh called for internal solution.

 

[bdslph]

THAT IS WHY RUSSIA IS NOT GIVING UP OF SYRIA and I DONT WANT A NEW TERRORIST BASE

GADDAFI IS STILL MY HERO was a good man sadly he was murder cold blood

 

[jamahir]

Just thought this was an eye opening video.

thank you, waled... the background vid i believe is from early 2011 and the whole vid is also available at ( Libya Truth (DnB Soundtrack) - YouTube ) that can also be reached by ( bit.ly/libyamusic ).

you have rightly named the thread "libya with gaddafi" as the vid again proves the life there generally... i regret that i in all these months did not post the whole vid but i thank you for posting.

as you can see, gaddafi moves through the city openly and the people react and cheer him in a natural manner... this despite the lies that nato media like bbc and al-jazeera had been saying since the beginning of the "uprising".

of course, he wears a ordinary hat here but when he appeared in "green square" ( tripoli ) on the 1st of september 2011 ( 42nd anniversary of the original al-fatah revolution ), he was wearing a bullet-proof hat ( whatever little protection it offered ) because of obvious threat of nato-supported ntc terrorists ( the rats, "rebels" ).

the vid offers view of what libya had before the nato invasion so i won't add anything right now about the facilities... i will only give links to the unique direct-democracy system that libyan jamahiriya had... the political arrangement that libya had was the most simple and scientific... together, it is called "the third universal theory" or "the jamahiriyan theory"...

1. the manifesto, if i can call it, which is called the "great green charter" or "great green document ( http://www.ilo.org/dyn/natlex/docs/SERIAL/57641/65910/F702695289/LBY57641.PDF ).

2. description of the simple direct-democracy political arrangement of a jamahiriya ( The Green Book - I ).

do read the social and economic parts of the "green book"... they are simple to read.

overall, the libyan system was a advancement of various socialisms in history including marxism.

Well how can you have a discussion with out our "Jamahiriya" expert ? @jamahir

^^^

@jamahir

^^^

Well there must have been some kind on in justice he might have done ... which caused people to go against him

the people who went against him were reactionaries who had for decades been armed and supported by nato... these were mainly in the 80's grouped under the lifg group, whose leader was abdul-hakim belhaj, who later merged his group with al-qaeda, which in turn in 2011 became merged with all the reactionaries coming from all parts of the world into the grouping called ntc ( national transitional council ), which name was of course created by nato which from early 2011 was calling for uno sanctions against libyan jamahiriya and soon for "uno military action" which really meant nato invasion.

libya in 2011 was what afghanistan saw in the 80's and what syria saw parallely in 2011... the libya invasion ( first terrorist proxy and then 40+ nato militaries ) was very important to nato because not only was libya the continued support for socialist/liberation groups all over the world, not only was libya speaking of various political issues ( like Muammar Gaddafi Speech To United Nations. September 23, 2009 (Full) - YouTube ) but also was presenting economic solutions like the "gold dinar" currency and the "africa development bank"... these were of course counter to nato imperialist/capitalist plans.

what is called "arab spring" was essentially the biggest nato conspiracy ever... thousands of nato proxy terrorists and 40+ nato militaries had a definite goal while invading libya... destroy the libyan socialist system and kill the man who was the most stubborn resistant against nato imperialism across the world.

right now, the libyan people resist the nato imposed faction-governments and want the jamahiriya system back ( manifestation pro kadhafi Aout 2015 Libye - YouTube ).

Avenge his murder? Muslims helped in attacking Libya. Here are the Muslim countries that publicly, officially, and directly attacked Libya: UAE, Turkey, Jordan, and Qatar.

The GCC strongly supported the action. The Arab League also gave a statement supporting the action.

There were a few Muslim countries that were against it. Pakistan was against it, "Peaceful political solution needs to be evolved by the Libyan people themselves in the spirit of mutual accommodation and national reconciliation.". Iran's President said, '"UN Should have sent mediators to Libya, not NATO Bombs" Indonesia called for a ceasefire. Bangladesh called for internal solution.

while the rest of what you say is correct, i must say that iran's president was asked by cnn on his views on gaddafi one day after the supposed death of gaddafi... ahmedinejad did not voice outrage like chavez or castro or putin but safely said this...

"We think it is the will of the people that should work and prevail everywhere - justice, freedom and respect to people. This is the right of all nations. But, of course, we feel very sorry that people are being killed, everybody. I wish everybody would respect justice freedom and there was no need for any conflict or clash."

 

[gau8av]

@jamahir while I strongly opposed NATO's actions in Libya, I find it very hard to believe that such a utopian socialist society would capitulate so easily.

I'm thinking that a lot of Libyans also wanted to live by the holy book rather than the green book, something the invaders exploited greatly.

 

[Madali]

while the rest of what you say is correct, i must say that iran's president was asked by cnn on his views on gaddafi one day after the supposed death of gaddafi... ahmedinejad did not voice outrage like chavez or castro or putin but safely said this...

You must understand that the relationship between Iran and Libya was not good. Even in that answer he shows his dissatisfaction, but Gaddafi wasn't his ally or friend, so he wouldn't have the same reaction. For example, with Chavez, Ahmadenijad considered him only an ally, but as a friend. Even years after his death, he would mention Chavez.

Anyway, in that quotation, this is how Ahmadenijad continues, "In the beginning, we recommended a dialogue between the two sides and all parties, but they did not pay attention to our recommendations. And, of course, NATO intervention was effective in exacerbating the conflict.

We have not received any statistics about the losses from both sides and I think instead of intervention, NATO could help to promote a dialogue among all parties."

In the same interview (your quotation is from a CNN Interview), he also mentions, "they could do things better in Libya, for example. From the very beginning, we've said there should be an international team to mediate in order to encourage all parties to reach an understanding. But NATO had ambitions in Libya. They wanted the oil resources in Libya. There was no need to kill so many people."

 

[jamahir]

@jamahir while I strongly opposed NATO's actions in Libya, I find it very hard to believe that such a utopian socialist society would capitulate so easily.

it has been said by observers, including one non-native who was a high political position in libya some years before 2011, that libyans ( who all had the right to bear arms ) were shell-shocked by the massive invasion... though these were people who on regular and direct basis participated politically in the society, had been lulled into complacency because of the comforts of their society.

yes, the libyan "government" was engaged internationally but the general citizen never would have thought of a day where 40+ militaries would invade, preceeded by thousands of terrorists from all over.

in the real invasion of tripoli ( there was a fake qatari-wood one earlier ), in the first hour, more than a 1000 defenders were killed... the people of tripoli had not only turned up a month earlier in a million at "green square" to celebrate 1st of september, they defended tripoli fiercely when it was finally invaded.

150,000+ libyans were killed by the end of 2012... the people resisted the nato-backed "rebels"... and the "rebels" employed extreme torture ( Rebel Atrocity Videos :: www.uruknet.info :: informazione dal medio oriente :: information from middle east :: [vs-1] )... and not only the "rebels", there were nato special forces who participated in these tortures ( war crimes ).

the seige of sirte town ( hometown of gaddafi and symbolic ) went for months and was greatly destroyed...

I'm thinking that a lot of Libyans also wanted to live by the holy book rather than the green book, something the invaders exploited greatly.

firstly, there were certain areas of libya where the reactionaries had some influence but in these same cities most citizens were jamahiriya supporters... like bengazi city, the supposed spark-plug of the "rebellion"... here, in early 2011 while bbc, al-jazeera and co. were talking of "regime atrocities", the citizens, especially ladies, were actually calling the libyan army to come liberate the city.

secondly, it was with the quran that the new libyan republic was begun in 1969 and "libyan socialist people's jamahiriya" established later... we must remember that muammar gaddafi in his other capacity was the "imam of all muslims", a single simple position which was of course opposed or not accepted by the reactionaries and the uncaring elsewhere.

thirdly, gaddafi was a adept of the quran and in the 80's had defeated some reactionary mullahs on live tv concerning knowledge and application of islami procedures and advises.

the libyan people accepted the jamahiriya system and gaddafi, as you saw in the op vid as also the recent one i posted... it was the reactionaries and the corrupt ( yes, there was corruption in recent years ) who perverted the holy book and presented it as counter to the green book.

if you look at the "great green charter" i linked above, you will find these...

-----------------

 

[Madali]

@jamahir while I strongly opposed NATO's actions in Libya, I find it very hard to believe that such a utopian socialist society would capitulate so easily.

I'm thinking that a lot of Libyans also wanted to live by the holy book rather than the green book, something the invaders exploited greatly.

I agree with you too. While, I oppose the NATO action and while I think Libya then was better than Libya now, that doesn't mean that Gadaffi was in any way a good leader. When no one came to help him out or support him, it showed he was a weak internal and external leader.

 

[Indos]

The instability in Libya currently is more caused by international intervention, particularly Egypt under current regime which has a nature as an anti Islamist regime. Islamist power particularly in Jintan is under such pressure not only from inside but also from outside power. It is better for Libya to embrace all power inside his country in order to bring unity and stability to the nation, and then kick out any foreign intervention that only can make the situation much much worst.

Every transition phase needs patience and learning process, particularly for nation which doesnt have any preparation to apply democratic system like Libya. It is something that is lacking in the middle east. Indonesia for instant has already had parliament system (even though the election is not fair) during its dictatorial regime (Soeharto) that at least has brought all actual power in the country into some kind of system that can enable them to start applying democratic system when the time for that is happening.

Other important social infrastructure that we already have before our democracy is many NGO and also relatively free media starting in 1990's which become more and more free until we approach 1998 (reformation/people power (relatively done by university students and intellectuals ). In essence, even Soeharto himself knows that democracy is the system that should be embrace in future Indonesia.