Is Ghaddafi lying about his son and grandchildren being killed by NATO strikes?

[Cleita]

Some in Libya seem to think so.

ttp://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/05/01/3204762.htm

But in the rebel capital Benghazi, where a parallel government is gearing up to take the reins should Mr Gaddafi be ousted or killed, it is suspected that news of death is nothing more than propaganda from the Tripoli regime.

"I don't believe it because it is all on the Libya channels and that is all lies," said Mohammed Dahash, 25, who works in a mobile phone shop.

"I don't think it is true because since February 17 everything Gaddafi has said has been lies," said salesman Ahmed Sidan, 20, evoking the start date of the anti-regime demonstrations that escalated into violent conflict.

"He did it before: in 1986 he said his daughter was killed but she is still alive," Mr Sidan said of Mr Gaddafi's claim that his adopted child, Hanna, was killed in an air raid ordered by then-US president Ronald Reagan.

"Gaddafi always lies," said Alsharifa Warfali, 48, a mother of seven.

"But if Seif is dead, so what? We've lost hundreds of sons in Benghazi. Gaddafi's son is not extra special."

The only source of this story is the Libyan government, which is still run by Ghaddafi. NATO has not confirmed it nor has any other independent source. Also there is that other pesky story that the son that was killed had joined the rebel forces in February. One shudders to think Ghaddafi could have killed his own son in retaliation and blamed it on NATO however, Saddam Hussein did it to his son-in-laws when they defected and he promised them that all was forgiven if they returned and then he had them killed. I would not put it past Ghaddafi to do the same.

So instead of everyone going off half cocked about children being killed, it seems we should wait and find out if this is true before becoming outraged. It's what Ghaddafi wants and the media and world are being manipulated by a murdering dictator trying to get sympathy.

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Cleita]

2. Well, they are blaming this on President Obama and

it seems we need facts to emerge before that.

[polly7]

8. I'd be interested in seeing where he was called a saint. nt

[Cleita]

11. I guess you haven't read the previous threads on this.

It's all Obama's fault that the poor, helpless dictator is getting his people killed and btw doing a good job of killing them himself with cluster bombs.

[EFerrari]

19. NATO would not be bombing Tripoli without Obama.

And waving the cluster bomb story doesn't really work once you realize the "rebels" are laying landmines that we are paying for.

I think that's what tipped me off about this Libyan adventure more than anything. The obvious flogging of atrocity stories for the sake of effect. That's how I came to recognize the war's salesmen, too, by how many syllables it took for them to say the word "atrocity".

[Cleita]

27. This is a civil war going on and war sucks.

Ghaddafi could end this today by stepping down from power. He's too cowardly to face the music like Mubarek did and would rather see this blood shed around him. He calls the rebels cats and dogs and you defend him. NATO is under command from the Netherlands and Obama is not the only one making decisions but other leaders of NATO nations as well. I really wish NATO would come forward with more information to explain their actions. They issued a press release on why they continue to bomb while Ghaddafi asked for a cease fire. It's because Ghaddafi keeps bombing and attacking his people when NATO ceases fire, so he can't be trusted. I believe that the truth here is somewhat different than what Ghaddafi wants the world to believe.

[EFerrari]

33. It's not only a civil war if NATO has taken sides, is it?

And, for that matter, we don't know how long CIA has been on the ground "advising" the "rebels".

And, Cleita, I've yet to defend Gaddafi.

[Cleita]

47. Civil wars like ducks can't be disputed.

Historically, other nations have meddled in civil wars and revolutions including our own but they are still civil wars or revolutions.

[EFerrari]

54. Yes, the State Department must be very proud of this destabilization

or "civil war" as you call it.

[Cleita]

67. Oh I guess it's just a bunch of crazy people trying

to be free. My bad.

[EFerrari]

83. Because as we know, the State Department has never set anyone up

for failure?

[polly7]

78. Right on. nt.

[polly7]

22. Yes, I've read them. Not once was he called a saint, or a poor, helpless

dictator. People are pissed that once again innocents are dying in something NATO has no business being involved in in the first place. 7 countries - 5 years. If Libya weren't a major-oil player in the ME it would be ignored just as was Darfur, the atrocities in SA and other oil-friendly nations, torture-buddies Uzbekistan .. etc. etc.

Speaking of cluster bombs .....

[cali]

73. find one post saying that, honey.

oh you can't? you're just up to your usual contemptible dog shit? what a shock. you know fucking well there is no fan club here for Qadaffi anymore than YOU love seeing babies bombed. fuck the type of shit you're pushing. it's disgusting.

[medeak]

3. Daily Beast reporting same

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2011-05-01/gaddafi-attack-is-the-libyan-dictator-making-some-of-it-up-for-propanda/?cid=hp:mainpromo1

[Cleita]

5. Good source and far more detailed than mine. n/t

[EFerrari]

9. None of the stories say that the children killed were the son's children.

Al Jazeera says they were grandchildren under 12.

The regime could be lying. But that's beside the point. We're bombing residences in Tripoli, just like Bush bombed that restaurant in the Iraq invasion and killed a bunch of DINERS.

Assassination is illegal.

[EFerrari]

4. That pesky defection story is from PressTV.

What about the bombing of this charity office, Cleita? Are you fine with this?

TRIPOLI, April 30 (Reuters) - Shattered glass litters the carpet at the Libyan Down's Syndrome Society, and dust covers pictures of grinning children that adorn the hallway, thrown into darkness by a NATO strike early on Saturday.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x997715

What kind of hit do we wait for before we get upset that NATO is dropping humanitarian bombs on Tripoli?

[Cleita]

7. I'm not fine with killing children however these stories

coming out of Libyan based government media are suspect until they are confirmed by independent sources. Also, no children were injured there. Why is nobody blaming Khaddafi for putting his people and children in harms way. He knows he's a target and should get out of the way of civilians, but he likes using them as human shields and NATO already warned him that they won't let him get away with it.

[EFerrari]

14. We have no business bombing Tripoli. And Gaddifi didn't drop those bombs.

NATO did.

It completely freaks me out that just a few short years after we saw this very same extra judicial man hunt, people don't recognize it.

[originalpckelly]

25. Oh my God.

That's all I can say to such ridiculous nonsense.

[EFerrari]

39. Not a very elegant argument. n/t

[originalpckelly]

12. And they should back off so Gaddafi can do it elsewhere in the country?

Let's just look at the potential outcomes here:
1. Gaddafi has the right of way to bomb the shit out of "his own" country. How many people will he kill ruthlessly to suppress a rebellion or any future one? How many people will be made an example of?

2. NATO bombs Tripoli, whilst trying to avoid civilian casualties. The only revenge killing will be if an airman goes nuts, something that's not as likely to happen. They may indeed kill civilians. But in the long run, how many more would be killed by non-intervention? Allowing Gaddafi to continue with his murderous ways will most certainly end the lives of many more people, wouldn't you agree?

So, with the current givens we must make the choice that NATO's actions are justified under the logic of harm minimization.

It is transparent, it is patently obvious that NATO is there because Libya has oil, but that doesn't mean that there wasn't a real problem. The problem is not manufactured, apparently, it's just that we give a damn because they have oil there, and the oil is the practical reason why our governments care about the problem.

We, however, should care about it because real human beings will be killed if something doesn't happen.

[EFerrari]

15. Bringing more harm to a conflict is not harm reduction. n/t

[originalpckelly]

17. OK, we stop this, and then what?

How many people will die then?

You're not being logical. More people will die then. Gaddafi wants to kill civilians, we are trying to not do it.

[EFerrari]

23. How do you know what Gaddafi wants?

In fact, he did make concessions and even gave up his WMD in order to stay off the enemy's list for the fake War on Terra.

Do you really believe this man would rather be killed than negotiate now? I find that very hard to believe.

Every state with WMD is now watching this and resolving never to give up their nukes. Like Pakistan for example. That's going to be the lesson here.

[originalpckelly]

31. You claim to care about the people of Libya, but you would let them continue to live under Gaddafi..

when they have clearly made the decision to be free.

[EFerrari]

40. You don't know what "the people of Libya" have decided, do you?

Unless there's a manifesto somewhere? The other day representatives from 61 tribes asked Gaddafi to step down.

Then, the representatives of 424 tribes told the rebels to cut it out.

By my count, "the people of Libya" are not behind this "rebellion".

And being against the bombing of Tripoli and the assassination of Gaddafi is not an endorsement of his leadership.

Good grief.

[originalpckelly]

50. The people rebelling made the decision.

And I think anyone with a little common sense would agree with it.

If you feel it's so acceptable to endure a dictator, go live in Libya and show how it's OK. Is it great for you? Do you wish to live under that? Then why are you willing to let someone else deal with that? You could say the same of the NATO bombing, but it is the lesser of two evils.

[EFerrari]

59. What happened to "the people of Libya"?

Now it's just "the people rebelling"?

And I'm going to just stop responding to these stupid Gaddafi lover accusations. They're embarrassing and the degrade the discussion on this board.

[originalpckelly]

61. No, you're not in love with Gaddafi, you're just willing to make excuses for him.

[EFerrari]

66. Opposing murder is not making excuses for Gaddafi.

Find one excuse I've made for him.

See? Embarrassing.

[originalpckelly]

72. Why were the kids there in the first place?

David Koresh, line one.

[Hannah Bell]

81. because they live there? why were *we* & our *bombs* there is more to the point.

[lamp_shade]

6. I suspect he might be. I'll wait and see.

[Cleita]

10. That's all I want anybody to do before playing into

his propaganda and sympathy ploy.

[Hannah Bell]

82. yeah, no innocents ever die from our (tm) freedom bombs. it's all

propaganda.

[Distant Observer]

13. NATO certainly Obliterated his residential home where his children stayed!

I guess that is OK with the bloodthirsty folks here about.

[originalpckelly]

16. Gaddafi is a Libyan David Koresh.

If we believe these reports, then it is clear that he endangered the lives of these kids by keeping them close to him during a time when it is logical he might be the target of violence, either by NATO forces or by the very people of his own nation.

Any surviving children should be immediately removed from the country to avoid any more loss. His negligence in this area is an indicator that he might have been using the kids as a human shield.

That is, of course, if you can believe him on this subject.

[polly7]

75. What ....... is NATO too stupid to realize bombing a building known

to contain innocents .. would kill innocents? You talk about caring about innocents ......... which children matter, and which don't?

[Cleita]

18. So we have proof a building was killed.

Do buildings bleed. Have you seen what he has done in Benghazi and Misrata with his cluster bombs? There is plenty of footage on the carnage there, but where is the outrage? Poor, misunderstood dictator must have sympathy, now.

[polly7]

74. Nobody is painting him as a poor, misunderstood dictator. Not one

person. Where are you coming up with this?

[ProSense]

20. Human Rights Watch, February:

Civil Society: UN General Assembly should suspend Libya’s UN Human Rights Council membership

As nongovernmental organizations from all regions of the world working in the field of human rights, we call upon the United Nations General Assembly to immediately suspend the rights of membership of the Great Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya in the UN Human Rights Council (HRC).

The General Assembly contemplated the possibility that suspension of a member's rights in the Human Rights Council might be necessary in the event of serious deterioration in the human rights situation that state. Resolution 60/251, which created the Council, provides, in operative paragraph 8, that "the General Assembly, by a two-thirds majority of the members present and voting, may suspend the rights of membership in the Council of a member of the Council that commits gross and systematic violations of human rights."

The Libyan government of Colonel Muammar al-Gaddafi, is committing "gross and systematic violations of human rights." A variety of sources report numerous repeated attacks by the Libyan authorities on the civilian population of Libya, including by firing live ammunition at demonstrators. Many hundreds of demonstrators have been killed by Libyan state authorities.

Colonel Gaddafi has admitted the systematic intent behind the violence unleashed on the Libyan population and has given cause for substantial concern that further violence will occur. On February 22, Colonel Gaddafi spoke of protestors as "cats and dogs" and threatened to "cleanse Libya house by house." His son Saif al-Islam al-Gaddafi said on February 20 that the authorities would "fight to the last man and woman and bullet" in combating the protests and threatened that "rivers of blood" would flow

<...>

It's absolutely despicable to try and portray Gaddafi as the victim.

[Cleita]

21. He's trying to portray himself as the victim. He's done

it before and it works. Look at all the bleeding hearts right here on DU.

[polly7]

24. What bullshit. NOBODY is painting him a victim.

The 'victims' are innocents who are killed simply because they happen to live there.

[Cleita]

32. He can end it today, by stepping down from power.

Today. The blood is on his hands and anyone who says otherwise is either foolish or in love with him.

[originalpckelly]

38. Precisely.

This all ends if he wants it to. I'm so terribly sorry that his family was killed, how many families has he killed in his reign of terror?

Those poor kids are victims no less of Gaddafi than any other family out there in Libya. He's responsible for them being with him.

[Cleita]

43. Except there is no proof that kids were killed.

He has lied about this before. Even as evil as he is, I can't believe he would put his own grandchildren in harm's way knowing he is a target and I doubt he has. He said there were children killed but no bodies have been shown or names released as it seems they have done in the past.

[originalpckelly]

46. He might have...

He is a dictator after all. You have to wonder if the part of his brain dealing with morality is completely messed up in the first place to become a dictator.

[Cleita]

52. Maybe, but other dictators have protected their

families, even Saddam Hussein and in the Arab culture families are the very first loyalty, before state, country or anything else.

[EFerrari]

44. Or has some quaint notion that sovereignty means something

and that dropping bombs on residences is not the highest form of diplomacy even when the United States does it.

[polly7]

57. No, the blood is on those who killed them even thinking there 'might' be

civilians inside. (Anyone who says otherwise is in love with death and warmongering ...... that's about as stupid as your comment, which is exactly what was said about us Iraq anti-war types who were called Saddam lovers.)

[originalpckelly]

34. If you had kids or grandchildren and a war was on...

and you had the resources to remove them from the area of combat, wouldn't you do it?

And if you wouldn't, but could, what does that mean?

Gaddafi is a selfish dictator who couldn't give a shit about the grandkids, he was obviously using them as human shields.

[polly7]

51. Do you know that his family has been allowed out of their residence?

The world is full of selfish dictators ........ you know nothing about how anyone feels about their grandchildren, and it's irrelevant anyway .......... they didn't deserve to die no matter 'where' they were. Obviously, it would have been known there were civilians in the building, so why bomb it???

This whole thing is sickening and deja-vu Iraq.

[originalpckelly]

58. A chance to end this and save many thousands of lives of many many more people v.

..ignoring the dictator and letting this go on, killing many thousands of civilians and rebels who are justified in their actions against their dictator?

This is not a situation we should be in as a world, but here we are. And in such a terrible situation judgments must be made to minimize harm to the largest number of people. If you have an opportunity to end the ongoing harm, and save many people, I suggest that it is acceptable.

[polly7]

71. Those people have a right to fight for their own indepedence, just like

any other sovereign people. Help them with weapons, food, support that doesn't involve killing innocents that have no say. And no, I'm not being heartless.

Yeah, the world is in a situation where many thousands of civilians are being killed .......... thinking Iraq and Afghanistan. Sorry, regime change for Libya was planned long ago. This was just another excuse to help it along and about as humanitarian as giving Viagra to the Afghan warlords.

[EFerrari]

29. Yeah, look at all the bleeding hearts that don't buy this old, tired bs

for the nth time.

[EFerrari]

26. It's absolutely despicable to put words in other peoples' mouths.

And Human Rights Watch lost their credibility when they began pimping for political credit for Obama, politicizing their humanitarian mission.

[ProSense]

28. Whose mouth?

It's absolutely despicable to try and portray Gaddafi as the victim.

Do you disagree?

[EFerrari]

36. No matter what he is, he has human rights.

Not to mention, assassinating a head of state is illegal.

[ProSense]

41. But the people who he murders don't?

Milosevic had human rights.

Idi Amin had human rights.

[EFerrari]

45. Yes, they all had human rights, too. What a concept. n/t

[ProSense]

49. You seem surprised! n/t

[EFerrari]

53. Surprised? No.

[Cleita]

62. I don't approve of assassinating anyone including

Saddam Hussein or Osama bin Laden, however, Qaddafi is not Hugo Chavez. He has done despicable acts during his dictatorship and proved that he is a practiced liar and murderer. I agree we should not be targeting him. NATO has issued a statement that they are not targeting him. I hope they are being truthful and if they aren't, then be outraged but not until then.

[Old and In the Way]

79. If a world body, such as the UN, concluded that a dictator, like Gaddaffi

was brutally slaughtering his people to maintain power, I'd have no problem voting him off the island. Give him 48 hours to vacate the country or face the prospect of financially induced assassination. Put a $10MM dollar price tag on his head. Seems like that would minimize collateral damage in the form of innocent lives and infrastructure and send a strong signal to future dictator wannabes in Libya or elsewhere that there are consequences to using military technology to suppress and slaughter the people to maintain your power.

I have no idea whether the claims that his son and grandkids were killed, but, if they were, it's totally on Gaddahfi's head. He put them in harm's way and, if he used them as human shields, and that's pretty cowardly act. I wonder how many sons and grandchildren he's responsible for killing? You reap what you sow.

[EFerrari]

84. No, you don't reap what you sow. Ask Iraq.

You reap what powerful people can get away with.

[EFerrari]

85. NATO also targeted him on Saturday when they shot up

the tv station where he was giving a live address.

Gaddafi isn't the only liar in this situation.

[rug]

30. Therefore, it's immaterial whether or not US drones killed his grandchildren.

A new low.

[ProSense]

35. No, it's not "immaterial"

How do you feel about these children, videos:

The displaced children of Libya

Inside besieged Libyan city

[rug]

42. Shall we exchange blue horror links? Will that allow you to justify dead children on that side?

[ProSense]

48. Shall we not

"Will that allow you to justify dead children on that side?"

Which dead children do you prefer: The ones Gaddafi said were killed accidentally or the ones he is killing deliberately?

[rug]

55. Neither. Nor will I try to justify either with blue links.

[ProSense]

64. "Nor will I try to justify either with blue links."

No justification, just facts. "Blue links," is that a tick?

[EFerrari]

37. Seriously. n/t

[Distant Observer]

56. Are NATO leaders LYING when they deny targetting Gaddafi family?? That's an

answerable question.

[EFerrari]

60. Thank you. n/t

[ozone_man]

65. Don't anger the war club.

;)

[ProSense]

69. Is Gaddafi lying?

Scepticism surrounds 'Gaddafi son's death'

Is that answerable?

[JVS]

70. They were flying in a no fly zone

or something

[malaise]

76. Bingo n/t

[Cleita]

77. Good question. See if you can come up with

some proof that they are lying.

[dems_rightnow]

63. The story's pretty unlikely

But who knows for sure?

[Cleita]

68. All I want is that people wait until the truth comes out

before hurling accusations about President Obama and others.

[Cleita]

80. Ghaddafi camp now showing a shrouded body that

they say is Saif's but the face is covered. It could be any dead body in the morgue. There are no bodies of children shown either. I saw this on Al Jazeera. I do not believe there is a video up yet to link to. When I see the bodies and have NATO confirmation then I will believe this dictator, not before.