DEBUNK THIS - There WERE NO human rights abuses in Libya according to UN Human Rights report

Originally posted by jonnywhite
Go here...
en.wikipedia.org...

Scroll down to Libyan civil war...

Anti-government protests began in Libya on 15 February 2011. By 18 February, the opposition controlled most of Benghazi, the country's second-largest city. The government dispatched elite troops and mercenaries in an attempt to recapture it, but they were repelled. By 20 February, protests had spread to the capital Tripoli, leading to a television address by Saif al-Islam Gaddafi, who warned the protestors that their country could descend into civil war. The rising death toll, which currently numbers in the thousands, was drawing international condemnation, resulting in the resignation of several Libyan diplomats and their call for the regime's dismantlement.

How do you know that this is true? Do you really consider wikipedia to be a reliable source?

More MSM stuff, you be the judge

www.cnn.com...

Libyan teen says Gadhafi's troops forced her to execute rebels

reply to post by ModerateSkeptic

Libyan teen says Gadhafi's troops forced her to execute rebels

Forced to her to execute rebels? wheres the proof? why i am not suprised CNN reported this first before anyone else eh? and look at the comment section at CNN page its disgusting;

and this what the MSM wants a Public reactions such as this.

troutslayer1 I sympathize with this woman and feel sorry for her; on the same token, you cannot value your life above another and shoot them in the head. That was not a worthy excuse for the men on trial in Nuremberg who were following orders, nor can it be in this case. Those were people she shot.

say what?

AnotherSN Shame on you. How many of the men from Nuremberg were isolated from their families and repeatedly raped? Shame.

and ths one who uses a facebook avatar even though shouldnt that be a copyright violation?

saturnsrim1 With a regime that used children as human shields I could see something like this happening. They need to take a look at how young these people are and go on a case by case basis in judging the extent of their guilt. I would hope that some kind of compassionate judgement be used on their behalf.

gaddafi used children as human shields? i saw the rebels do the same thing

ObamaJoe Who knows if it is real,,,,,,,,,,,

I agree with ObamaJoe.

I am not surpised CNN Closed down the comment section for that news artlice.

Originally posted by bjarneorn

Originally posted by jonnywhite
Go here...
en.wikipedia.org...

Scroll down to Libyan civil war...

Anti-government protests began in Libya on 15 February 2011. By 18 February, the opposition controlled most of Benghazi, the country's second-largest city. The government dispatched elite troops and mercenaries in an attempt to recapture it, but they were repelled. ...

Read that carefully. That's the reason this happened, at least in (significant) part.

I think you missed this part, when you read it. In 3 days, the rebels "repell" forces ... that is not a peaceful demonstration. This is an armed to the teeth force, that is ready to take on the government ...

In 2005, the UN passed a resolution named Responsibility to Protect. What is it?

Protect who ? How does mirage planes, bombing tanks help to protect the people? Since they are bombing the "legitimate" government, they are prolonging the war, not cutting it short. And in prolonging the war, they are also sure to increase the casualties.

Look here then:
en.wikipedia.org...

Again, scroll down to Massacres.

Note the following two passages:

International Criminal Court chief prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo estimated that 500–700 people were killed by security forces in February 2011, before the rebels took up arms. According to Moreno-Ocampo, "shooting at protesters was systematic"

The International Federation for Human Rights concluded that Gaddafi is implementing a strategy of scorched earth. The organization stated that "It is reasonable to fear that he has, in fact, decided to largely eliminate, wherever he still can, Libyan citizens who stood up against his regime and furthermore, to systematically and indiscriminately repress civilians. These acts can be characterized as crimes against humanity, as defined in Article 7 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court."

reply to post by jonnywhite


Again the rebels start the shooting first, here from my thread, as Gaddafi forces firing into Protesters thats again like saying Gaddafi used jet fighters to bomb the Protesters even thought that isnt true.


Benghazi- Rebels storm a local army base and force the soldiers at gunpoint to give up there tanks and weapons


Quryna reports that rebels storm and overtaken a prison in Benghazi,freeing 1,000 nonpolitical prisoners



According to Reuters "Protesters in the port city of Benghazi chanted slogans demanding the resignation of prime misnter Baghdadi Al-Mahmoudi. There were no immediate reports of demonstrations agaisnt Gaddafi


attacking your own country soldiers,police officers,setting fires on banks, freeing terrorists and nonpolitical prisoners from prisons well claiming that you want democracy doesn't sound very revolutionary.

Now does it?

From your reply

The International Federation for Human Rights concluded that Gaddafi is implementing a strategy of scorched earth. The organization stated that "It is reasonable to fear that he has, in fact, decided to largely eliminate, wherever he still can, Libyan citizens who stood up against his regime and furthermore, to systematically and indiscriminately repress civilians. These acts can be characterized as crimes against humanity, as defined in Article 7 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court."

The International Federation for Human Rights is a corrupt organization which always defends americas actions in there every wars and has never looked into americas scorched earth.

If human rights abuses, or the lack of them, were really an issue, why did the rebels find it more important to create a central bank early on?

(from “Libyan Rebels” Create Central Bank, Oil Company by Alex Newman)

As analysts debate possible motives behind President Obama’s United Nations-backed military intervention in Libya, one angle that has received attention in recent days is the rebels’ seemingly odd decision to establish a new central bank to replace dictator Muammar Gadhafi's state-owned monetary authority — possibly the first time in history that revolutionaries have taken time out from an ongoing life-and-death battle to create such an institution, according to observers.

I'm starting to see a pattern here. Human rights and U.N. politics is just a cover story, as far as I'm concerned. People have been speculating for quite some time that the U.S. sent troops into Iraq simply because Saddam planned to switch his oil sales from dollars to euros, not because of some non-existent "weapons of mass destruction".

reply to post by JadedTree

why did the rebels find it more important to create a central bank early on?

Good point why did the rebels create a rothchild/western backed so early well everyone else in the EU and north america are both having a financial crisis? whats the agenda of that? what will the libyans gain out of a wortless dollar?

Originally posted by Kryties
I literally just saw a story on the TV news about the servant of the wife of Hannibal Gaddafi, son of the Colonel. She has third degree burns to most of the upper half of her body from having boiling water poured on her head by the wife when she refused to beat one of the Gaddafi daughter's for crying too much.

From: au.news.yahoo.com...

A woman who worked for Muammar Gaddafi as a nanny for 12 months says she twice had boiling water poured over her head, leaving her with horrific wounds.

Shweyga Mullah's story has emerged as rebels gain control of Tripoli, Gaddafi is on the run and his wife and children have fled to Algiers.

A CNN report revealed the allegations of torture after Ms Mullah was found abandoned in a room at one of the Gaddafi family's luxury seaside mansions in western Tripoli.

She says the boiling water was poured over her head by Gaddafi's wife, Aline Skaf.

She told CNN that Aline became angry when her daughter was crying and Ms Mullah refused to beat her.

"She took me to a bathroom. She tied my hands behind my back, and tied my feet. She taped my mouth, and she started pouring the boiling water on my head," Ms Mullah told CNN.

She was taken to hospital by a guard, who was threatened with jail if he helped her again.

"When she did all this to me, for three days, she wouldn't let me sleep,' Ms Mullah told CNN.

"I stood outside in the cold, with no food. She would say to staff, 'If anyone gives her food, I'll do the same to you.' I had no water - nothing."
Ms Mullah says she was burned twice, the latest incident three months ago.

I am pretty damned sure she didn't stand there and pour boiling water over her own head mate.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/c0c28269a1ea.jpg[/atsimg]

edit on 30/8/2011 by Kryties because: (no reason given)

There were lots of victims in the hospitals of Tripolis with such burns, but these burns were not caused by boiling water, but by the NATO bombings. So it is possible that the burns of that woman were also caused by the bombings (as we know that the Gaddafi buildings had been bombed too) and she only made her story up because she is afraid of the rebels as she worked for the Gaddafi family.
There is no way to say what is true, as long as she is not in a safe place and can speak freely.

Originally posted by Kryties

Originally posted by CasiusIgnoranze
reply to post by Kryties

 

Even after all the lies the mainstream media has reported, you still believe them?

Most likely, the Rebels poured boiling water on her head and she is now being paraded by the Mainstream Media because naturally the majority of people will buy this BS of a story.

They interviewed her mate. These words came out of her own mouth, not anybody elses.

Im going to start by saying she definitely could have been telling the truth. It is your job as a scholar to at least entertain the idea that she was offered some form of deal to say whatever.

A potential story line could be:
Women gets burned in a fire or bomb.

CIA: Youre burned, thats a shame. You know, America has some of the very best plastic surgens.
Woman: I do not live in America.
CIA: You could.....
Woman: I have no way to get there and/or pay for surgeries. My face is ruined by your bomb.
CIA: Well... all you have to do is say it was Ghadaffi's wife and all expenses paid.

Of course, theres no proof of this but it is your duty as intellectual to question. It is also your duty to take into question the lies of the source in which you are receiving information. After all the lies, id have to say im more willing to trust my speculation over almost anything in the MSM.

reply to post by bjarneorn


Yes I recall the German one.

Thing is. I've never witnessed a successful false flag done to incite the Americans into war. I do think that America does it elsewhere between two nations, but I honestly think it's justified usually. The Europeans on the other hand, have a long record of inciting such things in Africa and India and the middle east. It's safe to say most wars today in those areas are their fault for causing division.

For the US, I just have never seen it done successfully. People say 9/11 was, but honestly, what have we gained from that? compared to 1999, we are closer to revolution, closer to anarchy, closer to putting the rich on the noose. Closer to mob rule, and in turn, a very bad day. So when people tell me the wealthy did it, it makes no sense to me, because now within the next 15 years, it's likely the rich will be killed.

I mean, if you are going to do it, I would imagine you would have some sort of long term gain, but I don't remember the tea party existing in the 90s.

Plus, how do you know it's the CIA or others? What if it's the Europeans, seeking to turn America into some client state. You just don't know. And I see no reason to blame any one group yet.

reply to post by USAisdevil


Perhaps some, and good for them. That doesn't change the fact that I saw doctors and teachers and "bros" out on the streets joining them.

It's the same thing when people tell me that Fox news is funding the tea party. Ok then. Well if the snake buys the farmer an axe, it's by his dollar that he looses his head.

Although no country is free of human rights violations, I believe western countries are the most guilty. There seems to be a great variance in ats member opinions on this topic. Folks either believe the msm or they don't. Why do people come to ats and push the msm perspective? what possible motive could one have?

reply to post by CasiusIgnoranze


The two Western countries in your little blurb, namely Canada and Australia, seemed to have been commenting on the human rights improvements i.e. progress.

As for the rest, you'll have to forgive me if commendations from countries that still allow stonings and "honor killings" don't exactly rank high on my list of people I'd trust to say there's no human rights violations.

And, btw, the fact that France is taking a stand against them says a lot. France is a country full of politicians that waffle on practically everything.

It seems the whole revolution thing had been planned already in advance and was not such a spontaneous thing.
Have a look at the Youtube Chanel of this nice young lady:
CCDiary "Supporting Libya's Revolution!" www.youtube.com...
The chanel was already created 01/20/2011 and all the uploads are Libya uprising related, no other stuff whatsoever.
The first video was uploaded on 02/18/2011 just 3 days after the beginning of the protests

Notice the strange "political correct" comment of that 20 yo girl with a strange diplomat-style language not only in this but also in her other videos. IMHO it is clear that these are not her own words, someone else must have written the text for her, for me it sounds as if she had a ghost writer who also writes the NATO press releases.
But where is she from? There is no info at her YT channel, but in the videos and comments she mentions that she is not from Libya.

I googled
+CCDiary site:www.youtube.com -libya -vlog
and the following links came up

A comment at YT Video "Are You Worthy?" by christinehassler
www.youtube.com...
"Thank you, your such an inspiration...nice hair and shirt - you look great!
I hope someday I can become a life coach like you "

(Christine is the author of the top-selling books, 20-Something, 20-Everything and the 20-Something Manifesto, and she's appeared on The Today Show and CNN as a spokesperson for today's young professionals.)
Who else not located in the US would know Christine Hassler?
So as she commented on that video, it is plausible to assume that the CCDiary girl is also located in the US.

Another comment of a Reuters Video "Prince Albert of Monaco weds Charlene Wittstock"
www.youtube.com...
"@ 0:09 observe? the exchange of glances between the two women "

So besides the Libyan "Revolution" she seems not to be interested in other revolutionary issues but just in high society glamour stuff.

So it seems this nice young lady is just a front woman for a Libyan Revolution Propaganda YT Channel which was already created just a few weeks before the uprising, which IMHO is evidence that the whole thing was orchestrated.

Another link: Eyewitnesses speak out: Has U.S. staged the Libyan coup?
www.tlaxcala-int.org...

reply to post by Gorman91

Thing is. I've never witnessed a successful false flag done to incite the Americans into war. I do think that America does it elsewhere between two nations, but I honestly think it's justified usually. The Europeans on the other hand, have a long record of inciting such things in Africa and India and the middle east. It's safe to say most wars today in those areas are their fault for causing division.

For the US, I just have never seen it done successfully. People say 9/11 was, but honestly, what have we gained from that? compared to 1999, we are closer to revolution, closer to anarchy, closer to putting the rich on the noose. Closer to mob rule, and in turn, a very bad day. So when people tell me the wealthy did it, it makes no sense to me, because now within the next 15 years, it's likely the rich will be killed.

The gulf of Tonkin started the VietNam war in ernest. It's been exposed and confirmed by de-classified transcripts.

“It was just confusion, and events afterwards showed that our judgment that we’d been attacked that day was wrong. It didn’t happen.” ~ Robert McNamara, Secretary of Defense in 1964

Over 1,100 pages of previously classified Vietnam-era transcripts released this week by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee highlight the fact that several Senators knew that the White House and the Pentagon had deceived the American people over the 1964 Gulf of Tonkin incident.

It would take over thirty years for the truth to emerge that the Aug. 4, 1964 Gulf of Tonkin incident, where US warships were apparently attacked by North Vietnamese PT Boats – an incident that kicked off US involvement in the Vietnam war – was a staged event that never actually took place.

The LBJ Presidential tapes, declassified and released in 2001, prove that LBJ knew the Tonkin incident never happened. After dressing down his Defence Secretary Robert McNamara for misleading him, Johnson then discussed how to politically spin the non-event and escalate it as justification for air strikes.

More confirmations:

www.infowars.com...

www.nytimes.com...

The LBJ Presidential tapes, declassified and released in 2001, prove that LBJ knew the Tonkin incident never happened. After dressing down his Defence Secretary Robert McNamara for misleading him, Johnson then discussed how to politically spin the non-event and escalate it as justification for air strikes.

“You just came in a few weeks ago and said they’re launching an attack on us – they’re firing at us,” Johnson tells McNamara in one conversation, “and we got through with the firing and concluded maybe they hadn’t fired at all.”

Surprise ! Surprise !

reply to post by xuenchen


That's an invented event, not an event planned.

Surprise surprise to you too,

reply to post by CasiusIgnoranze


What about all the murders they did with their bombings...last time I checked the right to live your life is a human right

reply to post by Gorman91

not an event planned

huh no the event was planned as a flase flag to start the war.

reply to post by Agent_USA_Supporter


Seems to me like it was a mistake that they ignored it being a mistake. Besides, didn't JFK land troops there first?

I don't even really see the reason to justify a war in those days. It was communism. That was good enough.

reply to post by Gorman91

It was communism. That was good enough.

Well your going to hate me for saying this but here goes people in East Germany now are saying things were better under communism then the united germany of today and thats a fact, and thats not good enough to start wars based on false information and intel.