I have gathered here some of the documents from:
//www.pougala.org/html/english.html
You can read and find out more about the truth behind the war agaisnt Libya, and also the whole picture of the real crisis of the world, Ociddent and Africa and Middle East....
Hope you will enjoy listening to this 3 parts video:
Ypu can read more about this subject, here:
Recently by Souri | Comments | Date |
---|---|---|
Ahamdi brings 140 persons to NY | 26 | Sep 24, 2012 |
Where is gone the Babak Pirouzian's blog? | - | Sep 12, 2012 |
منهم به ایران برگشتم | 23 | May 09, 2012 |
Person | About | Day |
---|---|---|
نسرین ستوده: زندانی روز | Dec 04 | |
Saeed Malekpour: Prisoner of the day | Lawyer says death sentence suspended | Dec 03 |
Majid Tavakoli: Prisoner of the day | Iterview with mother | Dec 02 |
احسان نراقی: جامعه شناس و نویسنده ۱۳۰۵-۱۳۹۱ | Dec 02 | |
Nasrin Sotoudeh: Prisoner of the day | 46 days on hunger strike | Dec 01 |
Nasrin Sotoudeh: Graffiti | In Barcelona | Nov 30 |
گوهر عشقی: مادر ستار بهشتی | Nov 30 | |
Abdollah Momeni: Prisoner of the day | Activist denied leave and family visits for 1.5 years | Nov 30 |
محمد کلالی: یکی از حمله کنندگان به سفارت ایران در برلین | Nov 29 | |
Habibollah Golparipour: Prisoner of the day | Kurdish Activist on Death Row | Nov 28 |
Dear APFS: Does it matter what I believe…
by Bavafa on Mon Oct 31, 2011 11:49 AM PDTPeople believed so.
And as a staunch anti-monarchy who believes we can do only based on our own deed rather which family we are born to, I would be a wrong person to ask.
However, It is also worth noting he was not elected by people, could not be voted out of power or criticized without impunity and certainly no accountability. So, what do we typically call this type of ruler?
'Hambastegi' is the main key to victory
Mehrdad
Mehrdad do you believe the late shah was a dictator?
by amirparvizforsecularmonarchy on Sun Oct 30, 2011 07:11 PM PDTYour view?
Thanks for posting this....
by Bavafa on Sun Oct 30, 2011 07:08 PM PDTI firmly believe no one will come and risk billions of $$$ and countless number of their service men just because they want to give us freedom and democracy, not to mention the freedom that may very well cut off their arm from the resources in the land they just freed.
So, those who cheerleading for the West to come and kick the Akhoon in the ass so we can live freely, they need to think again. There is a price tag for that which we will have to bare with our future independence.
'Hambastegi' is the main key to victory
Mehrdad
Simorgh Jan
by Veiled Prophet of Khorasan on Sun Oct 30, 2011 04:28 PM PDTI agree with most of what you say both about Libya and to Amirparviz.
The business about revolution in Russia and China is just out. It will never happen because their leaders will not allow it.
Russia - already had its revolution and people saw the results. Putin has about 69-70 % approval. A lot better than our president by the way.
China - people are reaping the benefits of good economy. They are very nationalistic and mistrust the West. I seriously doubt Western ability to stir much trouble.
Amir Parvis jan
by Simorgh5555 on Sun Oct 30, 2011 03:54 PM PDTYour analysis is sometimes out of touch with reality. Most women.in Eyypt during the nineteen sixties and seventies were more secular than they were today when Nasser was around. In the eighties and nineties there was a sudden surge in women who wore the hijab out of choice. The same trend developed in Tunisia, Algeria and Morocco. Most of the people there have taken to Islam in an unprecedented scale despite the fact they had the most pro Western liberal governments. Yes, the West can trumpet up religion and use it as an instrument to further political objectives but the idea that yhey can mobilise an entire society into Islamic fundamentalism borders on the paranoia.
VPK
by Simorgh5555 on Sun Oct 30, 2011 03:47 PM PDTLets be fair and not dismiss it outright. There is still every opportunity that Libya can flourish without Gaddafi and he was by no means the be all and end all. However, there is danger lurking in the horizon in the form of British,US and French companies plundering its resources but a half decent government can avoid it.
Most of the filks who supported this military campaign were the ordinary Arabs on.the street who are by no means pro-American. I also would not have hesitated to establish the No Fly Zone but the arming of the rebels and the subsequent push to change the regime was a bad turn for the Libyans.
Whats happened has happened. Libya is where it is now without Gaddafi. Lets hope for the best.
Simorgh ...
by Veiled Prophet of Khorasan on Sun Oct 30, 2011 03:28 PM PDTJust as you I was also taken by emotions and admit the mistake. Now it appears that the revolution was a sham. And a disaster.
I don't know if this is general America or just Obama policy; it is garbage.
People! Your views are just a Reflection of the media campaign
by amirparvizforsecularmonarchy on Sun Oct 30, 2011 02:45 PM PDTto interfere into the affairs of a sovereign country and put islamists in power.
Pity, to have so many willing tools/fools/call yourselves what you like at the push of a button. Personally I hallucinate that this is an issue where Iranians should push for movement, we should be prepared to put some money, effort and other resources behind achieving honesty. But I'm afraid that
you can't expect countries to change overnight. If Honesty mattered to our society the political pressure applied on us in the late 1970's would have failed and we would not have been a nation that acted in a gutless way based on our own cultural standards.
Gaddafi
by Simorgh5555 on Sun Oct 30, 2011 11:45 AM PDTThe point which Darius made about Gaddafi unleashing the full force of his army including tanks and helicopters is undeniable. As I said my immediate reaction would have been the same as Sarkosy which was to protect the civillians at all cost. However, once the UN mandate changed from No Fly Zones to Regime Change then one has to question the motive of NATO and the USA.
Furthermore, I think Gaddafi using the full might of his army underscores how even without chemical weapons someone like Gaddafi can be dangerous. Blair and Bush were rejoicing how they got Gaddafi to abandon his chemical weapon project and wrongly believed that the danger he posed was 'neutralised'.
This is exactly what is happening with Iran. All this talk about Iran posing a nuclear threat is a nonsense when it too, just like Gaddafi, can use his conventional weapons to dangerous effect. It is the regime in Iran which is the problem with or without nuclear capability.
There is no doubt that Gaddafi's reaction was disproportionate to say the least, and this was genuinely brought on by his madness. He did what Ali Khamenei did when in the summer and winter of 2009- rather than offer a reconcillatory gesture to his opponents he made the costly error of making an enemy out of the whole country by comparing them to drug addicts, rats and Al-Qaida terrorists. At this crucial point he should have let his favourite son Saif al Islam to do the talking and help quiten the rebellion.
What Gaddafi did unfortunately, is not only alienate his own people but undermine the huge achievements in society and economy. The progress Libya made in the last twenty years and the new lease of life Gaddafi's regime was given went straight down the toilet. Gaddafi had managed to build his country without a single dollar from the IMF or Europe. This was a remarkable achievement for an Afircan country when you compare it to resource rich Nigeria which has been srewed royally by its former colonial masters. Now this new Transitional Government says it wants to start from "scratch" because of its hatred of Gaddafi is nothing less than bonkers.
In addition, what he feared most - intervention by foreign invaders became true. God knows whats going to happen to Libya and whether the France and Britain will rob Libya's huge resources blind but I hope the new government will embrace the positive economic and social achievements of Gaddafi and not borrow money from the IMF or the West to rebuild their country.
Gaddafi
by Simorgh5555 on Sun Oct 30, 2011 11:45 AM PDTThe point which Darius made about Gaddafi unleashing the full force of his army including tanks and helicopters is undeniable. As I said my immediate reaction would have been the same as Sarkosy which was to protect the civillians at all cost. However, once the UN mandate changed from No Fly Zones to Regime Change then one has to question the motive of NATO and the USA.
Furthermore, I think Gaddafi using the full might of his army underscores how even without chemical weapons someone like Gaddafi can be dangerous. Blair and Bush were rejoicing how they got Gaddafi to abandon his chemical weapon project and wrongly believed that the danger he posed was 'neutralised'.
This is exactly what is happening with Iran. All this talk about Iran posing a nuclear threat is a nonsense when it too, just like Gaddafi, can use his conventional weapons to dangerous effect. It is the regime in Iran which is the problem with or without nuclear capability.
There is no doubt that Gaddafi's reaction was disproportionate to say the least, and this was genuinely brought on by his madness. He did what Ali Khamenei did when in the summer and winter of 2009- rather than offer a reconcillatory gesture to his opponents he made the costly error of making an enemy out of the whole country by comparing them to drug addicts, rats and Al-Qaida terrorists. At this crucial point he should have let his favourite son Saif al Islam to do the talking and help quiten the rebellion.
What Gaddafi did unfortunately, is not only alienate his own people but undermine the huge achievements in society and economy. The progress Libya made in the last twenty years and the new lease of life Gaddafi's regime was given went straight down the toilet. Gaddafi had managed to build his country without a single dollar from the IMF or Europe. This was a remarkable achievement for an Afircan country when you compare it to resource rich Nigeria which has been srewed royally by its former colonial masters. Now this new Transitional Government says it wants to start from "scratch" because of its hatred of Gaddafi is nothing less than bonkers.
In addition, what he feared most - intervention by foreign invaders became true. God knows whats going to happen to Libya and whether the France and Britain will rob Libya's huge resources blind but I hope the new government will embrace the positive economic and social achievements of Gaddafi and not borrow money from the IMF or the West to rebuild their country.
Iranian 1979 and Libyan 2011 have no parallels
by Iqbal Latif on Sun Oct 30, 2011 10:16 AM PDT'the Libyan situation is not comparable with Iran of 1978-79,'
Iranian 1979 and Libyan 2011 have no parallel, Iranian revolution was not based on defacing of a nation. Shah made a nation did not deface it. There were all around Iranian heroes or heroines who made Iran proud, Iran tryst with destiny of 1,400 years old preoccupation with creed and dogma that ran in its bloodstream as undercurrents of the unheard and unknown voices made the revolution possible. To compare Libyan embryonic revolution with Iran possible change of destiny revolution is a sham contrast. 1979 has put a 5,000 year civilisation face to face with either progress or decadence. Iran is well ahead of any revolutionary zeal, they have learned form this revolution of 1979 that way forward is negation of creed and archaic doctrine. In next 100 years of Arab spring Iranian counter revolution hopefully will lead the renaissance and sow the seed of permanent change of minds along the entire crescent of Islam.
//iranian.com/main/blog/iqbal-latif/defac...
Iranian 1979 and Libyan 2011 have no parallels
by Iqbal Latif on Sun Oct 30, 2011 10:16 AM PDT'the Libyan situation is not comparable with Iran of 1978-79,'
Iranian 1979 and Libyan 2011 have no parallel, Iranian revolution was not based on defacing of a nation. Shah made a nation did not deface it. There were all around Iranian heroes or heroines who made Iran proud, Iran tryst with destiny of 1,400 years old preoccupation with creed and dogma that ran in its bloodstream as undercurrents of the unheard and unknown voices made the revolution possible. To compare Libyan embryonic revolution with Iran possible change of destiny revolution is a sham contrast. 1979 has put a 5,000 year civilisation face to face with either progress or decadence. Iran is well ahead of any revolutionary zeal, they have learned form this revolution of 1979 that way forward is negation of creed and archaic doctrine. In next 100 years of Arab spring Iranian counter revolution hopefully will lead the renaissance and sow the seed of permanent change of minds along the entire crescent of Islam.
Thanks
by Mohammad Ala on Sun Oct 30, 2011 09:36 AM PDTThanks Souri jan;
I have been busy and have not had time to participate or watch the videos. I just watched the first one. There was another person from Africa who praised Kaddafi for good things he did for Africa. As I wrote before... there are good dictators and bad dictators... most of bad dictators were good dictators at one time who benefited the West.
It's all about this "different debate"
by Souri on Sun Oct 30, 2011 07:10 AM PDTDK, you said:
"Now that the Tyrant is toppled thanks to Nato Strikes helping the rebels
may lead to a government whose ideals and shape may be very different
from a "Jefforsonian Democracy" and may not fit our Western Standards
and values is an entirely different debate."
The same as Roozbeh Gilani stated in his blog here :
"The fact that a lot of revolutions get hijacked by the most reactionary
and anti revolutionary segments of the society (per Iran 1979 and
possibly Lybia 2012) is another story...."
//iranian.com/main/blog/roozbeh-gilani/tr...
But this is all I am trying to point out!
You mean: let's get out of the hole now, then if we fall in the well, we will see!
You mean: let see 50 000 persons die, to see where this will lead us!
We have tried it in our country. Remember?
When a foreign organzation want to come and help a struggling nation, you have to dig more to find their true motivation!
An internatinal organization like NATO, who didn't lift a small finger for the people of Rwanda where 800 000 persons have been tortured, raped and killed in only 10 days, an organization who never bothered for the Libyan people who were under the attrocitites of a rough tyrany (according to Nato) for 42 years.....suddenly decide to go and liberate these poor nation, only to bring them the chao!
We saw what happened in Iran, Iraq, Afganistan....
We see what is happening in Libya, Sirya, Yemen....etc
But each time, we say: But this is another story! Let do it, then we will see the result!
I say: Let face this another story, before comitting!
This is called "damage control"
The alternative would have been to sit idle and watch them
by Darius Kadivar on Sun Oct 30, 2011 06:09 AM PDTbe slaughtered like in a Roman Arena ...
Spartacus 1960 - (Parte 2) Duello nell'arena
How "civilized' would that have been ? given that that unlike the Iraq or Afghanistan invasion this was not in retaliation to a terrorist attack on Western Soil but an act of War by the leader of a country member of the United Nations on his very own people using military means which go beyond controlling what that nation's government deems as "trouble makers" through traditional means like anti mob Police when they use tear gas or Police on horseback to charge into a mob in order to disperse them.
As such the violence Gaddafi was confronted to was proportional to the violence he delivered using Tanks and Air force and Bazookas to reduce the demonstrations to smithereens.
That goes beyond a "revolutionary" scenario. It's nothing more nothing less an act that makes the regime immediately illegitimate according to any moral or political standard.
The savagery displayed in Syria and Yemen ( although in the case of Saleh, the fellow unlike Gaddafi and Bachar El Assad at least tried to negotiate with the opposition before things went out of hand ) is similar to a civil war than merely a revolution.
Gaddafi was offered an way out on several occasions and he refused them all the time. He even went as far as comparing himself to the Queen of England ...
Libya:Gaddafi compares himself to the Queen in latest rant ( Daily Telegraph)
How more dellusional can one get ?
So to see the Left Wing Intelligentsia spill crocodile tears on the way Gaddafi died and was humiliated is truly a sign of intellectual dishonesty and hypocrisy.
These were the same CITIZENS OF THE WORLD who supported Gaddafi in the first place dubbing him the "Che Guevera" of Africa back in 1969:
//www.bbc.co.uk/afrique/nos_emissions/2011/10/111020_kadafi.shtml
So it is Not suprising that they hesitated in denouncing Gaddafi's tyranny and ultimately refused to see him toppled given that the likes of Gaddafi, Assad and basically all the regimes which have clamped down so brutally on their people are a product of the anti colonialist movements after WWII.
That Neither India, Brazil , China, or South Africa refused to endorse the intervention at the UN Security council is not a surprise. Yet these "moralist" often ranted against the tyranny of Western Neo Colonialism but refused to lift a finger for the Libyans or Syrians today. As for the Arab league it hesitated before rallying to the cause thanks to Qatar who at best had Oil interests to preserve.
Otherwise were it not for Sarkozy everyone couldn't care less to see the Libyans be slaughtered as long as the UN security council was divided on the question of interfering or not.
Sorry but any serious observor of what happened in Libya won't be convinced by the "Third Worldism" arguments in defense of Gaddafi anymore.
If France's Sarkozy had not interfered for whatever calculations one may suspect him of as the head of State of a foreign military power, the Libyans would have been slaughtered like Sheep.
With Gaddafi looking on like Roman General Crassus in Spartacus and Cruxifying the Rebels to the very last and not just them but their families too ...
Gaddafi promised rivers of Blood if the "Rats" did not interfere.
So there was No Moral Dilemma :
THE MORAL DILEMMA: BBC Debate - Should Nato have Interfered in Libya?
Any civilized person seeing the threat and sensitive to the plight of the Libyans would and should have defended this intervention.
What you saw in Bahrain, Syria and Yemen are the consequence of the NON Intervention of Obama more than anything else.
Had the Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Attacked Gaddafi in the Very Fist Week without hesitation given that the Libyan Tyrant was on his knees he would have been toppled in less than a week.
Instead he waited and gave Gaddafi his second chance.
A Wolf is even more dangerous when wounded but alive.
The 50 000 deaths are the direct result of Obama's hesitation and lack of vision.
Otherwise all local dictators in the region including in Bahrain or Syria or Yemen would have most probably tried to find a peaceful way of starting a transition by fear that Western Powers would interfere.
Now that the Tyrant is toppled thanks to Nato Strikes helping the rebels may lead to a government whose ideals and shape may be very different from a "Jefforsonian Democracy" and may not fit our Western Standards and values is an entirely different debate.
May I remind you folks that the Sharia is a direct heritage of Gaddafi's era :
Law of Libya - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
and not the regime that this bloody tyrant overthrew 42 years ago under the Monarchy of King Idris :
Pictures of 1960s Libya: Cosmopolitan Life Before Gaddafi | LightBox | TIME.com
So Don't expect me to spill crocodile tears for his regime.
Good Riddance and may the Libyans pave the way for a better and peaceful future for themselves and hopefully a democratic one if that is the choice of the majority.
Otherwise who are we to lecture them on their values while sitting comfortably watching them fight for it and die for it on TV ?
TRIPOLI BRIGADE: France 24's Groundbreaking Documentary on Libyan Rebels
Those who are perplexed with the causes of Libyan revolution!
by Iqbal Latif on Sun Oct 30, 2011 04:35 AM PDTThe story Of A Rich Dog And A Poor Dog fits the account of the Libyan mass frustration very well. This is an uplifting, inspiring, and comforting story about being who you are. When material possessions are used to measure personal worth, it's discovered that true happiness and genuine wealth only exists where there is freedom to be one's self and develop one's natural abilities. Kingston, a wealthy pedigree dachshund meets Rags, a country hound. Each one believes he has everything, until they meet.
The Story Of A Rich Dog And A Poor Dog is a timeless fable for everyone it tells us that freedom is one of the most important things in life. Liberty means freedom. The opposite of freedom is slavery. Liberty is more important than security. The black slaves a few hundred years ago would have given up their shelter in exchange for being free. Slavery is horrible, even if the chains and bars are made of gold. A gilded cage is not much better than a dank prison. Libyans felt they were wealthy slaves, but still slaves. Slaves that enjoyed luxury and tranquillity, but still slaves. Libyans were fed up in their gilded cages.
Revolution will brew in any society where minds are inhibited and controlled, the net result is that orthodoxy and dogma will face big revolutions as a consequence, strings attached on minds of man are just too weak to hold freedom of man in this open world.
US-Imposed Democracy!
by G. Rahmanian on Sat Oct 29, 2011 06:39 PM PDTIf you were to ask the Japanese what they thought of their US-imposed democracy, I don't think they would say anything bad about it. The West Germans, Italians, etc. also owe their present democracies to the US and allied forces.
Mamad - a couple of points
by Simorgh5555 on Sat Oct 29, 2011 12:51 PM PDTMy point is this: Never ever count on the U.S. and its allies to bring "democracy" - either through the barrel of guns or by whatever means. The change must come from within...
That is the trouble. The change cannot come within. It will never come without violence.
One of they key factors we have not menioned here is that the American/European intervention was not just supported by the normal US lackies such as Saudi Arabia but it was also supported by the "newly liberated Arab" governments of Tunisia and Egypt as well as an overhelming number of Arabs. If only you could see them in Edgware Road in London you would think that Gaddafi was Ariel Sharon! Infact, I have never seen Arabs rejoice a death of politician to the extent I saw it with Gaddafi.
At least for now, the West have not got their hands on anything and if the tranisitional government in Libya is smart enough it would use the money from its oil export to rebuild the damaged social infra-structure without taking loans from the West or get foreign companies to rebuild the country. The country has not gone down the pits as yet and I truly wish the Libyans a happy future. If the Libyans screw it up then it is their fault.
Lets hope it doesnt reverse the good things Gaddafi actually did for Libya and does not go down the path of Islamic fundamentalism.
Simorgh
by Mammad on Sat Oct 29, 2011 12:42 PM PDTMy point was not to say, "I told you so," or about the VF regime that is rotten. My point is the following:
Never ever rely on the U.S. and its allies - and more generally on any foreign power - to bring "democracy" to Iran. Change must come from within.
You have supported all sorts of actions against the VF regime that cannot be, in my opinion, reconciled with what a true nationalist could want. That was the point.
Mammad
Mehrban
by Mammad on Sat Oct 29, 2011 12:39 PM PDTIn my view - and this is what I have said many times - the Shah did do a few good things. But, the Libyan situation is not comparable with Iran of 1978-79, simply because intellectually and socially, Iran of 1978-79 was still more advanced than Libya, and had experienced the Constitutional Revolution and the Oil Nationalization movement, two great movements that Libya has never had. Even today Libya is a tribal society, whereas even in 1978 Iran was not a tribal society.
At the same time, the 1979 Revolution was by and large peaceful and from within - aside from Daei jaan Napoleon version that "kaar kaar-e Engelis haa bood" - which is again different from Libya.
My point is this: Never ever count on the U.S. and its allies to bring "democracy" - either through the barrel of guns or by whatever means. The change must come from within.
Mammad
Aghay Mammad
by Mehrban on Sat Oct 29, 2011 12:27 PM PDTWouldn't you say the better comparison is what happened to Iran in 79. Except the king was not too much into bloodshed. People with glass houses........shouldn't talk about souls too much.
Ps. European and US stock markets have risen significantly since Gadafi's fall. Coinsidence? Maybe.
Oh I forgot: Screw Ebadi for lack of Support to Libyan muslims
by Darius Kadivar on Sat Oct 29, 2011 12:21 PM PDTShirin Ebadi: For Islam and Humanity - TIME
;0)
The choice for libyan
by Simorgh5555 on Sat Oct 29, 2011 12:25 PM PDTPolitical freedom or social and economic freedom?
iN 1978, Iranians with their stomachs full were duped by Islamists said "freedom at all cost" Look where it got them?
This is not a decion I can make for Libyans. If I were living in Libya or a similar country would I say lets start a civil war at all cost just to get political freedom? Are Iranians happy now? Are Tunisians better off? Time will tell.....
Real News.com
Gaddafi Opened Economy As He Increased Repression
Modern History of Libya: As Gaddafi opened country to neo-liberal reforms, he cracked down on opposition at home
//therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=6417
"Women make up 60% of Universities and are pilots and judges"- Professor Ali Ahmida
Souri Jan
by Simorgh5555 on Sat Oct 29, 2011 12:05 PM PDTYou are welcome. The CIA should be credited for telling us the real truth about Libya!
Mamad
by Simorgh5555 on Sat Oct 29, 2011 11:58 AM PDTI will own up if I have made a mistake. I have not totally reversed my opinion but there are troubling questions which bothers my conscience. My mistake was being swayed by my emotions when I saw the wholesale killing of Libyans in Benghazi. From the CIA Factbook and numerous economic social and economic analysis of Libya, the country had improved dramatically. Even Prince Charles had sent Gaddafi his appreciation of the treatment of Christians. Gaddafi was certainly a monster and there is evidence of prison purges and mass graves similar to the 1988 executions but unlike Iran at least social freedoms were in place.
Thank you dears Simorgh and Mammad
by Souri on Sat Oct 29, 2011 11:45 AM PDTSimorgh jon, The information you just posted here, were really great. With your permission, I used it for another article, somewhere else.
Mamad jon, I was reading your posts on that subject, from the beginning. Only at that time, it was too soon, to express my views, because I didn't have so much information.....and the readership was not so curious, either :)
Bests;
What did I tell you, Simoorgh?
by Mammad on Sat Oct 29, 2011 11:34 AM PDTDid you not say just a week or so ago that "Libyan are not doing too badly?" What did I tell you? Read the following. It already contains all the information that you mention (all accurate). The NATO "liberation" of Libya is a farse.
//www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/tehranbure...
You are a monarchist and I am a republican. But, it seems we agree on this.
Souri Khaanoum:
Thank you. I have ben saying the same for quite sometime, and been attacked for it (see the above article). Some people have been willing to sell their soul to see Iran "liberated" in Libyan style. That is liberation? My ...
Mammad
Was Gaddafi really bad for Libyans?
by Simorgh5555 on Sat Oct 29, 2011 10:59 AM PDTThe West may have its reasons to be soar with Gaddafi because of the downing of the PAN AM flight in Lockerbie or its support of the IRA but if you look at the CIA Fact book on Libya the economy was one of the best in Africa and indeed of the whole Arab world. Libya boasted the lowest infant mortality rate, the highest llife exectancy, one of the most successful economies that was not built on debt from the IMF or loans from European countries. Education and healthcare were widely available for the population and the rights of women in society and the field of employment are much better than any African country. Urbanisation and public sector develpment saored. Sure, Gaddafi was mad and needlessly made Libya enemies through stupid support of revolutions abroad and an un-necessary war with Chad and Sadat's Egypt but was the ensuing carnage really worth it? He killed 25 dissidents overseas but that is still less than what the IR has killed abroad and even in its own counttry. According to official statistics Libya only executed 18 people in 2010 which hardly supports Barak Obama's assertion that 'Gaddafi terrorised hi own people for 40 years". And neither does it compare to the 300 plus people killed (officially) by the IR every year. More impressive is that given Libya is an African country it has the lowest anti-HIV and AIDS cases in the world.
What does the Libyan people actually want? Did the Libyans make the same mistake of Iranians in 1978 when they enjoyed the highest standard of living in the region but bought the Islamist lies hook, line and sinker? Is political freedom valued higher than social freedoms and economic progress that you want to turn the whole country upside down? I am not a Libyan and I don't know the answers but my gut feeling tells me that they are going to pay a heavy price. If you saw the majority of women who were partying in London and Manchester when Gaddafi's death was announded, you would have noticed they were wearing a hijab. I am not by any means saying the Shah was a mad dog like Gaddafi but there are strong parallels to be drawn.
My initial reaction when Gaddafi sent heliocopters to bomb civilians in Benghazi was utter disgust but following his death by a lynch mob and the new government vowing to place Islam at the centre of legislation I am having doubts as to whether my support of Obama was misplaced. Who were these Rebels and who armed them before NATO and America supported them militarily? Gaddafi had always been opposed by Islamists, and whilst not all of his opponents were Muslim Fanatics the majority of them were.
Again, these are troubling questions.
Anyway here are the CIA Country Factbooks on Libya
country comparison to the world: 212 Net migration rate: 0 migrant(s)/1,000 population (2011 est.)
country comparison to the world: 94 Urbanization: urban population: 78% of total population (2010) rate of urbanization: 2.1% annual rate of change (2010-15 est.) Major cities - population: TRIPOLI (capital) 1.095 million (2009) Sex ratio: at birth: 1.05 male(s)/female under 15 years: 1.04 male(s)/female 15-64 years: 1.06 male(s)/female 65 years and over: 0.96 male(s)/female total population: 1.05 male(s)/female (2011 est.) Maternal mortality rate: 64 deaths/100,000 live births (2008)
country comparison to the world: 88 Infant mortality rate: total: 20.09 deaths/1,000 live births
country comparison to the world: 98
male: 22.06 deaths/1,000 live births female: 18.02 deaths/1,000 live births (2011 est.) Life expectancy at birth: total population: 77.65 yearscountry comparison to the world: 58
male: 75.34 years female: 80.08 years (2011 est.) Total fertility rate: 2.96 children born/woman (2011 est.)country comparison to the world: 66 Health expenditures: 6.6% of GDP (2009)
country comparison to the world: 89 Physicians density: 1.9 physicians/1,000 population (2009) Hospital bed density: 3.7 beds/1,000 population (2009) Drinking water source: improved: urban: 54% of population rural: 55% of population total: 54% of population unimproved: urban: 46% of population rural: 45% of population total: 46% of population (2000) Sanitation facility access: improved: urban: 97% of population rural: 96% of population total: 97% of population unimproved: urban: 3% of population rural: 4% of population total: 3% of population (2008) HIV/AIDS - adult prevalence rate: 0.3% (2001 est.)
country comparison to the world: 81 HIV/AIDS - people living with HIV/AIDS: 10,000 (2001 est.)
country comparison to the world: 95 HIV/AIDS - deaths: NA Children under the age of 5 years underweight: 5.6% (2007)
country comparison to the world: 80 Education expenditures: NA Literacy: definition: age 15 and over can read and write total population: 82.6% male: 92.4% female: 72% (2003 est.) School life expectancy (primary to tertiary education): total: 17 years male: 16 years female: 17 years (2003) Government ::LIBYA Economy ::LIBYA
Economy - overview:
Thank you so much DK
by Souri on Sat Oct 29, 2011 10:26 AM PDTfor these great info.
I really appreciated.
Yes, Polac was/is a genius....
I remember when he criticized his boss Bouygues, and how he had been fired fo that! So crazy.............
This was a loss for the French viewers.
Souri jan indeed He was married to an Iranian woman
by Darius Kadivar on Sat Oct 29, 2011 10:10 AM PDTand lived in Iran for 2 years before the revolution which he said were the best years of his life ...
He once said his former wife was related to Hoveyda and was a "princess" but I was never able to find her real name but she may have been a distant cousin.
You can Watch Polac questioning Okrent about her infamous interview of Hoveyda:
L'explication de C. Okrent sur l'interview d'Hoveyda
He often hangs around Iranian circles and I saw him at the Persian Restaurant Mazeh :
//www.mazeh.com/francais/galerie013.html
But last time I saw him he appeared very ill. He is very old now. But truly made TV History with his controversial programs ;0)
He was a splendid journalist even if i did not always agree with his views but I admired his wit and uncompromising stance particularly towards Media Corporations.
That was one of the reasons he ultimately was fired from the channel he was working for because he criticized his boss Hervé Bouyges on TF1.