Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/

The Real Reason for NATO Attacking Libya ?

1151618202125

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 873 ✭✭✭ed2hands


    Jonny7 wrote: »
    Some people pay attention to the horror of war only when it involves the US/Israel, but ignore the other conflicts and wars around the globe. Selective outrage if you will.

    And equally, some people ignore the horrors of war when it involves the US/Isreal. Or condone it. Same thing.

    Selective ignorance if you will.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,696 ✭✭✭Jonny7


    ed2hands wrote: »
    And equally, some people ignore the horrors of war when it involves the US/Isreal. Or condone it. Same thing.

    Selective ignorance if you will.

    Again highlighting my point - this obsession with US/Israel. I used to be a victim of it myself.

    I don't notice the same obsession with Russia, or China, or India, etc :)

    Back on thread - this obsession is clearly evident with the voltaire group who sent reporters down to Libya with a clear agenda to seek to portray the conflict in a certain way.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,539 ✭✭✭davoxx


    Jonny7 wrote: »
    I don't notice the same obsession with Russia, or China, or India, etc :)
    when they invade countries for oil/money and claim to be on the side of good, then maybe, just maybe you'll see an obsession ... though i'm sure i won't see the same support for them :)

    or Pakistan, they have nukes ....


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,202 ✭✭✭Jeboa Safari


    davoxx wrote: »
    it was not humanitarian intervention, it was regime change.
    simples.

    secondly it was a sovereign state running internal affairs ...

    so why do you think it was legal? what laws make it legal? cite a few for my benefit ...

    It was sanctioned by the UN, and the question was aimed at jackiebaron who is again posting his usual rubbish and faux-outrage so he can have a go at the US, and claiming its an illegal war.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,539 ✭✭✭davoxx


    It was sanctioned by the UN, and the question was aimed at jackiebaron who is again posting his usual rubbish and faux-outrage so he can have a go at the US, and claiming its an illegal war.
    regime change was not sanctioned ... so i'd say it was illegal

    and to be fair it's not faux-outrage ... the us has been known to start illegal wars ....


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,006 ✭✭✭Daithi 1




  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,539 ✭✭✭davoxx


    Daithi 1 wrote: »
    <the truth people refuse to acknowledge, in a you tube video>
    what shocks me most will be the response to this that "it was still a good idea to get rid of him, remember lockerbie?"

    reading some of the posts here on this site regarding his death only re-enforces my belief that most people are too stupid to understand the con, despite claiming that the are not ...

    awaiting proper discussion of this video, but expecting to get some nonsense about it being propaganda by russia as they want to kill everyone and make us all commies ...


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,408 ✭✭✭studiorat


    Daithi 1 wrote: »

    What is this? Who's she testifying to? Looks like a communist party meeting to me.

    Is this a Stalin Society meeting? I think it is...


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,006 ✭✭✭Daithi 1


    studiorat wrote: »
    What is this? Who's she testifying to? Looks like a communist party meeting to me.

    Is this a Stalin Society meeting? I think it is...

    Here is the full version.



    Lizzie Phelan's highly acclaimed testimony starts @ 16:48.
    Le témoignage très acclamé de Lizzie Phelan commence @ 16:48.
    O aplaudido depoimento de Lizzie Phelan começa @ 16:48.

    Dan Glazebrook (independent analyst), Lizzie Phelan (journalist), and Harpal Brar (politician and writer) provide much-needed analysis, counterpropaganda and polemic on 'Libya, Africa and Imperialism' in a public meeting convened by Oxford's Stop the War Coalition. Phelan and Brar recently returned from Libya and provide substantial firsthand insight.

    Dan Glazebrook: starts 0:11; continues 1:13:26. Lizzie Phelan: starts 16:48; continues 1:06:07. Harpal Brar: starts 28:42.

    Tuesday, 4 October, 7.30pm -- Oxford Town Hall, St Aldates, Oxford, UK.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,408 ✭✭✭studiorat


    So what did you think of it? Do you actually support these guys?

    I was surprised to Brar say he thought 911 was a good thing. A sign that the SWP have destroyed the Stop the War Coalition for sure. Fcukers like this think anyone who kills Amercians is a freedom fighter, supporting Jihadi's,

    The same idiots were all about supporting the Kurdish people when Saddam was a de facto partner of the US. And after the US invaded Iraq, they began supporting Saddam because the US was after him, dropping the Kurds because they supported the overthrow of the dictator.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,006 ✭✭✭Daithi 1


    studiorat wrote: »
    So what did you think of it? Do you actually support these guys?

    I was surprised to Brar say he thought 911 was a good thing. A sign that the SWP have destroyed the Stop the War Coalition for sure. Fcukers like this think anyone who kills Amercians is a freedom fighter, supporting Jihadi's,

    The same idiots were all about supporting the Kurdish people when Saddam was a de facto partner of the US. And after the US invaded Iraq, they began supporting Saddam because the US was after him, dropping the Kurds because they supported the overthrow of the dictator.

    Don't know much about Oxford to be honest. All I know is Lizzie is an independent reporter who spent time in Libya, came back and told what she'd seen. I believe her.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,408 ✭✭✭studiorat


    Daithi 1 wrote: »
    Don't know much about Oxford to be honest. All I know is Lizzie is an independent reporter who spent time in Libya, came back and told what she'd seen. I believe her.

    Independent? She says she works for Press TV and RT... Too many times she's introduced as an "Independent Journalist", definitely something going on there.

    You're presenting propaganda from a group who think that every Western intervention is wrong, period. And who take the stance that what ever opposes that intervention is by default right, regardless of who they end up supporting. Their stance is agressive, thoughtless and idiotic.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,006 ✭✭✭Daithi 1


    studiorat wrote: »
    Independent? She says she works for Press TV and RT...

    You're presenting propaganda from a group who think that every Western intervention is wrong, period. And who take the stance that what ever opposes that intervention is by default right, regardless of who they end up supporting. Their stance is agressive, thoughtless and idiotic.

    Umm, as far as I remember she said she had worked for them but isn't currently. Matters little to me anyway. What she said confirmed what I had already believed about the situation in Libya.

    "The truth is the truth even if you are a minority of one."


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,408 ✭✭✭studiorat


    Daithi 1 wrote: »
    "The truth is the truth even if you are a minority of one."

    What a load of rubbish. The quote is backwards btw, you do understand the nuance of that don't you?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,006 ✭✭✭Daithi 1


    studiorat wrote: »
    What a load of rubbish. The quote is backwards btw, you do understand the nuance of that don't you?


    Pathetic.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,696 ✭✭✭Jonny7


    Daithi 1 wrote: »
    Umm, as far as I remember she said she had worked for them but isn't currently. Matters little to me anyway. What she said confirmed what I had already believed about the situation in Libya.

    "The truth is the truth even if you are a minority of one."

    She reports for Russia Today.

    From the Voltairenet.org site
    Thierry Meyssan, Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya, Mathieu Ozanon and Julien Teil are safe. British journalist Lizzie Phelan of Press TV, who was also in danger, was with them as was the team of Telesur. Walter E. Fauntroy, former United States congressman and former assistant to Martin Luther King also arrived safely.

    Those other names should be familiar, they've been caught misreporting and lying about the situation in Libya.

    If you are interested in conspiracy theories there's one right there for you.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,006 ✭✭✭Daithi 1


    Lizzie Phelan née Cocker is an independent war journalist and reporter from the United Kingdom. She is best-known for her reporting from Libya, and for her stance against NATO intervention in that country.

    Articles and affiliations

    Lizzie Phelan has been reporting for Russia Today, Press TV,[1] Pravda.ru,[2] and the Voltaire Network.[3] Under the name Lizzie Cocker she has written for the Daily Mail[4] and for the Morning Star where she reported, among other things, on anti-war rappers Lowkey and Akala[5] and the Impeach Blair campaign waged against UK Prime Minister Tony Blair.[6] She also reports for the Green Left Weekly.[7]

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lizzie_Phelan


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,539 ✭✭✭davoxx


    Jonny7 wrote: »
    She reports for Russia Today.

    does not mean that what she reports is rubbish ... just mean that what she reports does not serve the usa war machine ...


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,696 ✭✭✭Jonny7


    Daithi 1 wrote: »
    Lizzie Phelan née Cocker is an independent war journalist and reporter from the United Kingdom. She is best-known for her reporting from Libya, and for her stance against NATO intervention in that country.

    Articles and affiliations

    Lizzie Phelan has been reporting for Russia Today, Press TV,[1] Pravda.ru,[2] and the Voltaire Network.[3] Under the name Lizzie Cocker she has written for the Daily Mail[4] and for the Morning Star where she reported, among other things, on anti-war rappers Lowkey and Akala[5] and the Impeach Blair campaign waged against UK Prime Minister Tony Blair.[6] She also reports for the Green Left Weekly.[7]

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lizzie_Phelan

    Thanks

    Here she is misreporting again. It's shameless.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V3LU3fR5PKk
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wtm6lq8Oaic


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,696 ✭✭✭Jonny7


    davoxx wrote: »
    does not mean that what she reports is rubbish ... just mean that what she reports does not serve the usa war machine ...

    She reports rubbish. Watch those links above.


  • Advertisement
  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,539 ✭✭✭davoxx


    Jonny7 wrote: »


    i did, what is being misreported exactly?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,696 ✭✭✭Jonny7


    davoxx wrote: »
    i did, what is being misreported exactly?

    Uhhm.. the fact that the rebels were taking Tripoli that day?

    She was caught pretty bad doing one of these :)

    07-minister.jpg


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,006 ✭✭✭Daithi 1


    Jonny7 wrote: »
    Uhhm.. the fact that the rebels were taking Tripoli that day?

    ninja snip :D


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,696 ✭✭✭Jonny7


    Daithi 1 wrote: »
    Ummm... They were taking Tripolli that day.

    Cant you get anything right ?

    Go to bed dude.

    Yeah you are right.. they were taking Tripoli that day, but not according to her.

    In the second "report" I linked..

    According to her it was a very small number of rebels which has already been put down - bad reporting

    She then reports that the NATO has obviously failed - nonsense

    She then claims that NATO have failed militarily so has revert to some sort of psychological warfare - more silliness

    She then goes on to say that the rebels cannot hold anywhere, naming Brega and Zawiyah, which the rebels are.. in control of

    Amazingly she says "NATO has not respected the United Nations in Iraq, Israel or anywhere else" - eh what?

    She then goes on a long tirade how Libya is such a failure for NATO and the Western nations, how they need an exit strategy, yadda yadda that they need this to invade Syria, murdering Libyan civilians in their thousands?

    Its bad rhetoric, it's heavily biased, it's god awful reporting and here it is in all its glory



    She should go back to being an activist.
    http://www.metacafe.com/watch/5772762/lizzie_cocker_the_equality_movement_imperialism/



    So its bad that Western media is biased but its okay if someone else presents biased reports if they validate your opinion?

    Bad reporting is bad reporting, whether its Fox News, or some activist "journalist" reporting for Russian state television.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,408 ✭✭✭studiorat


    Daithi 1 wrote: »
    Lizzie Phelan née Cocker is an independent war journalist and reporter from the United Kingdom. She is best-known for her reporting from Libya, and for her stance against NATO intervention in that country.

    [...]
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lizzie_Phelan

    re: wiki article...
    I have retagged the article with unreliable sources, based on significant issues with many of the sources cited (please see the reliable sources noticeboard). Some of the sources cited are reliable, that does not dismiss the issue of the unreliable ones. Too many of these sources are blog/opinion/highly biased/fringe sites


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,006 ✭✭✭Daithi 1


    Jonny7 wrote: »
    Uhhm.. the fact that the rebels were taking Tripoli that day?

    She was caught pretty bad doing one of these :)

    07-minister.jpg


    Rebels had not reached Tripolli by August 21.



  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,539 ✭✭✭davoxx


    Jonny7 wrote: »
    Uhhm.. the fact that the rebels were taking Tripoli that day?

    She was caught pretty bad doing one of these :)

    07-minister.jpg

    you're wrong here, you might have chosen to forget this ...

    "During the fall of Tripoli on 21 August 2011, it was widely reported that he (Saif al-Islam Gaddafi) had been captured by NTC forces, but on the night of 22 August he appeared at the Rixos hotel entrance, where foreign journalists were staying."

    yeah in your eyes, she was clearly wrong, as she actually chose to report news rather than make up propaganda ... please if this is why you think she is misreporting, i'd say you owe the young lady an apology ...


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,539 ✭✭✭davoxx


    Jonny7 wrote: »
    Yeah you are right.. they were taking Tripoli that day, but not according to her.
    seemed like she was, she was there, and she saw first hand what happened. if you don't believe her because her story contradicts that of the war machine, well then this forum is not for you, as you obviously believe what you were told ...
    Jonny7 wrote: »
    In the second "report" I linked..

    According to her it was a very small number of rebels which has already been put down - bad reporting
    how is it bad reporting? what is she misrepresenting? did she not check her facts before reporting?
    Jonny7 wrote: »
    She then reports that the NATO has obviously failed - nonsense
    they did, they killed civilians, invaded a sovereign nation under a false pretence and forced regime change .. unless you agree that that was their objective ...
    Jonny7 wrote: »
    She then claims that NATO have failed militarily so has revert to some sort of psychological warfare - more silliness
    well nato was spreading lies about what happened and who did what, so yes that is a form of psychological warfare ... why do you think they paraded the dead leaders body around?
    as a sign of respect no doubt right?
    Jonny7 wrote: »
    She then goes on to say that the rebels cannot hold anywhere, naming Brega and Zawiyah, which the rebels are.. in control of
    when were they in control of? how much control? was fighting still going on?
    you know the answer to this, and you know that there were a few rebels, there, a few nato forces there, and that they had not secured the area yet ...

    Jonny7 wrote: »
    Amazingly she says "NATO has not respected the United Nations in Iraq, Israel or anywhere else" - eh what?
    do you even know what the UN resolution was? do you know what nato did? i find myself as having to dismiss all your biased comments. you seem to pour out the same unfounded, non-researched nonsense again and again.

    if you are saying that nato has followed the un and respected their decision, you are frankly 100% wrong, and this alone puts into question any further comments by you.
    Jonny7 wrote: »
    She then goes on a long tirade how Libya is such a failure for NATO and the Western nations, how they need an exit strategy, yadda yadda that they need this to invade Syria, murdering Libyan civilians in their thousands?
    they will need an exit strategy, once the oil is sorted, have you not been watching the news? iraq, afghanistan?

    and 'yadda'? i don't think she said 'yadda', you might have heard that in your head, but that is not what she said. if you have a problem in what she said you should just quote her, not make it seem like you could not be bothered to listen.
    Jonny7 wrote: »
    Its bad rhetoric, it's heavily biased, it's god awful reporting and here it is in all its glory
    yes that is what you are presenting me with in your reasons for dismissing an independent report who i think is well renowned as being honest and fair ...
    Jonny7 wrote: »
    so you don't like activists or you don't like people who have morals? why can't she do both? she seems quite good at both, and she is articulate and presents the full story ...
    Jonny7 wrote: »
    So its bad that Western media is biased but its okay if someone else presents biased reports if they validate your opinion?
    it's bad when anyone does it, but you believe the western nonsense as fact, and then dismiss anything that counters it as biased ...
    Jonny7 wrote: »
    Bad reporting is bad reporting, whether its Fox News, or some activist "journalist" reporting for Russian state television.
    What difference does reporting for the Russians make? are you against them inherently because they are 'commies'? is this were this distrust stems from? you know rt is the second most viewed foreigner news channel in usa after bbc ...

    just because they report the unpleasant truth which you would rather ignore than face, does not mean that they have misreported ...


    you have not presented any evidence to support your claim of her misreporting ... you have present your opinion of her as a Russian activist, but that has nothing to do with her reporting skills nor here integrity in reporting unbiased news ..


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,539 ✭✭✭davoxx


    Jonny7 wrote: »
    Uhhm.. the fact that the rebels were taking Tripoli that day?

    She was caught pretty bad doing one of these :)

    07-minister.jpg
    what was she also saying that the war on iraq was illegal and that they did not have wmd? back then who knew how the search for wmd would turn out ...


  • Advertisement
Advertisement