So Ghadaffi dies

[barry luxton]

We have all known what a scapegoat is, and though this man should have stood trial, he did not, he died because a frenzied number of people chose to have him murdered.

 

Your assumption is not correct with regards to the words spoken by the commander who captured him, he has stated today that he died within a feirce cross fire between his and gadaffies' fighters, he tried to save him but was unable to. He was badley wounded when he took him out of the culvert. The man went on to say he does not know where the fatal bullet came from. In addition he stated that because he was the commander who captured him, he takes responsibility. Now that don't appear to be an assumption to me, so you either accept it or not.

Edited October 22, 2011 by barry luxton

[Phone]

barry,

 

I suspect they (whomever) will try to "clean" the story up as much as possible for the world press. On Russian TV this AM it was reported Ghad did not "beg" but "commanded" the rebels not to shoot him.

 

Just glad he's no longer a problem is life. Dead, is pretty much dead - maybe stories are already started "it wasn't him" aren't they?

 

Phone

[Sportsman]

How easy it is to make judgements on peoples actions from the comfort and safety of our chairs in front of our computer screens.

I spent 6 years in Libya in the 80's. I remember one event in Tripoli around 1984. An attempt was made on gadaffi's life by 4 dissidents. They failed and fled the scene, going to ground in a block of flats and taking hostages.

The army bought in two tanks and flattened the block of flats along with all of the residents, including women and children. Everybody was killed. I wonder how many more were killed by the secret police afterwards. Almost certainly the families of the dissidents and very possibly anyone who knew them.

That is what it is like living under totalitarian rule. Most of the fighters involved would never have known anything else. They know that violence and terror works because they have witnessed it for their entire lifetime. Gadaffi is gone but it will take a long time for his legacy to disappear.

 

There is a strong possibility that had he survived then his followers would have continued the fight and we would have had a similar situation to Iraq after the war was supposedly won. Killing him possibly saved thousands of lives, or don't they count?

[Now there's a right un.]

So, we now know he died due to the fact a bullet penetrated his skull, exterior membranes and entered his brain.

Yet, when captured he was seen walking and talking.

 

The very standing of those who sought to replace Gaddafi is now no longer in doubt.

The new regime will be no different to the old.

 

 

Sometimes better the devil you know.....

[Sportsman]

So, we now know he died due to the fact a bullet penetrated his skull, exterior membranes and entered his brain.

Yet, when captured he was seen walking and talking.

 

The very standing of those who sought to replace Gaddafi is now no longer in doubt.

The new regime will be no different to the old.

 

 

Sometimes better the devil you know.....

 

On what do you base this rather startling assumption?

[Now there's a right un.]

BBC sources and this link below.

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/oct/2...ot-wound-doctor

 

 

 

A man who murders a thousand is a murderer.

 

A man who murders one is....wait for it....still a murderer.

 

Coupled with the alleged abuses againt Gaddafi supporters we have the same regime with a different name and head.

 

 

Which bit of that is difficult?

[Sportsman]

BBC sources and this link below.

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/oct/2...ot-wound-doctor

 

 

 

A man who murders a thousand is a murderer.

 

A man who murders one is....wait for it....still a murderer.

 

Coupled with the alleged abuses againt Gaddafi supporters we have the same regime with a different name and head.

 

 

Which bit of that is difficult?

 

Not difficult, just nonsense.

 

gaddafi wasn't shot by the regime, he was shot by one or more individuals.

That does not make the new regime like the old one.

 

By that standard if anyone in the UK is murdered that makes all members of parliament complicit and by definition, murderers.

 

You said "better the devil you know"

The problem is that you don't know, you have no comprehension, no understanding

Edited October 24, 2011 by Sportsman

[Now there's a right un.]

Not difficult, just nonsense.

 

gaddafi wasn't shot by the regime, he was shot by one or more individuals.

That does not make the new regime like the old one.

 

By that standard if anyone in the UK is murdered that makes all members of parliament complicit and by definition, murderers.

 

You said "better the devil you know"

The problem is that you don't know, you have no comprehension, no understanding

 

 

 

 

 

 

Why didn't you just call me thick?

 

I don't know, I have no comprehension nor understanding....wow.... at least I managed to get my shoes correctly fitted. So I can take it that you are..........well what are you?

Surely you are learned.

Before you answer, please permit me to bow and pay homage to you and your superior intelligence and intellect.

Far be it from me to criticise.

 

BUT.

 

 

A group of people decide one day to rid themselves of a tyrant, yes Gadaffi was a tyrant. They rebel, continually begging for western assistance, send money, tanks, aircraft, finally overthrowing a regime run by Gadaffi.

Gadaffi is a leader who daily infinged international law with regards to the treatment of his countrymen.

The rebels win, they capture Gadaffi, they have a wonderful opportuity to show themselves better than Gadaffi by offering him the rights that they themselves fought for.

Nope, they capture him, without a bullet in his head. They intimidate him, bully him and finally shoot him.

 

Now correct me if I am wrong but didn't Gadaffi do just the same??

 

 

What the hell is the difference between the two regimes??

[Steve Walker]

What the hell is the difference between the two regimes??

 

The Gaddafi regime's crimes were authorised by the leadership and committed by a disciplined military and secret police force.

 

Gaddafi's death was condemned by the leadership and enacted - if claims that he was executed are correct - by an undisciplined militia which was little more than an angry mob.

 

You may as well say that the recent murder of a child killer by a fellow prisoner is equivalent to the UK having a statutory death penalty.

[Sportsman]

Why didn't you just call me thick?

 

I don't know, I have no comprehension nor understanding....wow.... at least I managed to get my shoes correctly fitted. So I can take it that you are..........well what are you?

Surely you are learned.

Before you answer, please permit me to bow and pay homage to you and your superior intelligence and intellect.

Far be it from me to criticise.

 

BUT.

 

 

A group of people decide one day to rid themselves of a tyrant, yes Gadaffi was a tyrant. They rebel, continually begging for western assistance, send money, tanks, aircraft, finally overthrowing a regime run by Gadaffi.

Gadaffi is a leader who daily infinged international law with regards to the treatment of his countrymen.

The rebels win, they capture Gadaffi, they have a wonderful opportuity to show themselves better than Gadaffi by offering him the rights that they themselves fought for.

Nope, they capture him, without a bullet in his head. They intimidate him, bully him and finally shoot him.

 

Now correct me if I am wrong but didn't Gadaffi do just the same??

 

 

What the hell is the difference between the two regimes??

 

What I was referring to is that you have no comprehension of life under a brutal dictator. There is no way you could have. To say better the devil you know is nonsense when the devil is gadaffi. To say something like that demonstrates that you have no understanding.

 

Your right, the rebels won but "the rebels" didn't capture gaddafi, some individuals did. It was not a state sanctioned murder as was the case with gaddaffi. It was some men who had been through hell due to this man in front of them. Who may well have lost friends and family to this man in front of them. They reacted in a not surprising way.

It's strange, you bemoan gadaffi's lack of rights in a country where no-one except gadaffi has had any rights for over 40 years and yet in another thread you state that in "your" world prisoners in UK jails would have no rights. They forfeit their rights by their action.

Surely if that applies to anyone it applies to Gaddafi