Target Centermass

Category: Middle East

  • U.N. Reaches out to Middle America

    The United Nations has an image problem among many Americans.

    Surprised? Of course you’re not. Despite its success as a political arena during the Cold War, a Coliseum for the diplomatic gladiators of the U.S. and the Soviets, the UN has long since strayed from its hopeful origins and purposes. At its best, it is bungling. At its worst, it is incredibly corrupt. In between lies the norm — spineless token gestures, misguided and half-hearted forays, hollow words and resolutions.

    Now, the UN wants to correct its image in the eyes of Americans with a planned revamping of the UN Human Rights Commission.

    The United Nations is out of touch with most Americans, who think the beleaguered organization has abandoned its mission to keep peace and protect human rights around the world, says U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan’s chief of staff.

    “In a very real way, we seem to have lost touch with the great middle in America, a middle which very much believes in the aspirational ideas of the U.N. … and who feel that we’ve drifted away from a commitment to human rights, a commitment to help the poor of the world,” Mark Malloch Brown said yesterday.

    The United Nations is under fire for several scandals including the oil-for-food program, charges of sexual abuse by U.N. peacekeeping forces and the resignation of a top official accused of sexual harassment, which Mr. Malloch Brown addressed in an exclusive interview with “Fox News Sunday.”

    The organization will propose changes in the coming weeks to begin repairing its reputation by revamping its “human rights machinery” to keep dictator nations off the U.N. Human Rights Commission.

    Governments making up the current membership include Cuba, Sudan, Zimbabwe and Saudi Arabia. Libya is the outgoing chair of the committee.

    The plan would “try and restore the credibility of this and have people on that commission who really are people of stature and reputation and record and come from countries of the same thing, with real human rights standing in the world,” Mr. Malloch Brown said.

    Go give it a read, as it does a good job of listing the current hot-button problems — chiefly, the oil-for-food scandal, subsequent investigations, and the allegations of atrocities by UN peacekeepers. Noticably absent is any mention of the organization’s horrible track record of its treatment of Israel vis-a-vis the surrounding despotic Arab states, but that would require too much honesty in the face of too much hatred and opportunism.

    How far has the UN fallen? They know they have a problem that they plan to address, and still I am sadly confident that they will fail to do anything more than change some window dressing.

  • Huge Lebanese Turnout for Anti-Syria Rally

    In the latest turn in a game of rally and counter-rally, tremendous numbers gathered in Beirut to protest Syrian influence in Lebanon.

    Hundreds of thousands of opposition demonstrators chanted “Freedom, sovereignty, independence” and unfurled a huge Lebanese flag in Beirut on Monday, the biggest protest yet in the opposition’s duel of street rallies with supporters of the Damascus-backed government.

    Robert Mayer at Publius Pundit provides a thorough and updated round-up of coverage of what he’s calling a “human tsunami” in Beirut.

  • Time: Zarqawi Planning U.S. Attacks

    Time magazine is reporting that terrorist Abu Mousab al-Zarqawi is wanting to strike inside the U.S., according to fresh information garnered from captured members of the bastard’s barbaric network.

    According to a restricted bulletin that circulated among U.S. security agencies last week, the interrogated aide said al-Zarqawi has talked about hitting “soft targets” in the U.S., which could include “movie theaters, restaurants and schools.”

    The list of possible targets is typical of the kind of monsters we’re facing. Anybody remember Beslan? Or the Israeli pizzarias and nightclubs?

    They will hit here. I’ve said before that I’m surprised they haven’t already. However, I’m not sure that Zarqawi has the resources, as he’s currently busy with creating as much mayhem as he can in Iraq while working feverishly to save his own hide. While he remains in active in Iraq, his ability to reach elsewhere with any significance. A small smattering of attacks in the U.S. are not going to affect American will and could increase demands for harsher action.

    Oh, and can we do something soon about securing our borders?

  • Ruling Fatah Fears Parliamentary Elections

    Now that Hamas has decided to participate in the upcoming Palestinian parliamentary contests, Yasser Arafat’s old Fatah henchmen are concerned about a severe blow to their own power.

    The Palestinians’ ruling Fatah movement, tainted by corruption and cronyism, is increasingly worried it will get trounced by political upstart Hamas in parliamentary elections.

    The Islamic militant group issued its challenge over the weekend, saying it will compete in the July 17 vote after avoiding such a showdown for the past decade.

    Hamas has shown no signs it wants to bring down Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas, and the violent movement, which has carried out scores of attacks on Israelis since its founding in 1987, appears to be satisfied with transforming itself into a strong opposition party. However, if Hamas wins control of parliament or even a large chunk of the seats, it could hamper Abbas’ ability to negotiate a peace deal with Israel.

    Realistically, it looks like a choice between the corrupt ruling terrorists, who may be pondering a shift of some degree or other towards moderation, and the newer, more violent terrorists, who have long claimed they were ready to step in and rule the Palestinians politically but are only now taking steps to do so.

    “Now there is serious competition,” said Sakher Habash, a senior Fatah official.

    With political survival at stake, Fatah old-timers reluctantly have agreed to hold primaries to select candidates for parliament and even commissioned opinion polls in search of the most electable candidates – remarkable changes for a calcified movement that has dominated Palestinian politics for four decades.

    However, the makeover may come too late to attract disgruntled voters, judging by Hamas’ sweeping victory in local elections in 10 Gaza towns in January. Many voters said at the time they don’t necessarily approve of Hamas’ violent ideology, but they want to punish Fatah for its high-handedness.

    It’s a shame that there is yet to arise among the Palestinians a viable third voice, a voice for moderation, freedom, peace and progress.

    Tension between the rival movements has been rising.

    On Sunday, hundreds of Hamas and Fatah supporters threw sticks and chairs at each other at Hebron University in the West Bank. Fatah activists tried to break up a Hamas rally ahead of student council elections Monday, but a Hamas leader on campus, Mohammed Ali, was confident of victory. “When Fatah felt that it was weak, and that it will lose the student elections tomorrow, they tried to ruin our parade,” he said.

    The prospect of defeat also has heated up rivalries within Fatah, particularly between veteran leaders, who refuse to step aside, and the younger activists.

    Palestinian uprising leader Marwan Barghouti, the most prominent member of the young guard, said Fatah needs a major overhaul to regain the trust of voters.

    “If Fatah doesn’t do this, it faces a real danger as far as its leading role is concerned,” Barghouti said. “The leadership of the movement has to move quickly to prove that it can correct these mistakes.”

    Barghouti, who is serving five consecutive life terms in an Israeli prison for involvement in deadly attacks, made the comments in a written statement from his prison cell, in response to questions submitted by The Associated Press.

    Last week, dozens of gunmen from the Al Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades, who have ties to Fatah, broke up a meeting of hundreds of grass-roots activists in Ramallah, shooting in the air. Participants said they suspect the gunmen were sent by those in Fatah’s Central Committee who oppose internal reform.

    However, the specter of defeat has spurred Fatah leaders into action.

    Habash said he has hired four polling companies to test the popularity of Fatah candidates. Those who score low will be cut from the slate without hesitation, he said in an interview in his Ramallah office. “This is strictly different from the elections we had in 1996,” he said, referring to the campaign for parliament in which candidates were largely chosen based on their loyalty to the late Yasser Arafat.

    Independent pollster Faisal Awartani, one of those commissioned by Habash, said choosing the most popular candidates is Fatah’s only chance of winning, but he fears the party is resistant to change.

    Ah, it’s all about electability over substance and ideas. Echoes of the Democratic Party’s 2004 nomination process.

    Hamas’ decision to compete, coupled with its observance of an unofficial truce with Israel, is a major step in what is seen as the group’s gradual transformation into a political party. Hamas remains committed to Israel’s destruction but has indicated it is willing to accept the establishment of a Palestinian state in the West Bank, Gaza Strip and east Jerusalem as an interim step.

    Peace and prosperity are simply not possible for the Palestinian people while a sizable portion of their society place priority on the destruction of neighboring Israel over their own success as a people.

  • Sgrena’s Car — How Fast, How Shot?

    An Italian government official and the U.S. Army are in sharp disagreement on the speed of the car that was carrying alleged hostage and anti-American journalist Giuliana Sgrena and the late intelligence officer Nicola Calipari.

    Italian Foreign Minister Gianfranco Fini told his country’s parliament today that the shooting was an accident, but he contradicted the U.S. military’s account of the incident. The U.S. Army’s 3rd Infantry Division, which controls Baghdad, said in a statement that the vehicle was “traveling at high speeds” and did not stop at the checkpoint, despite a number of warnings. The military said U.S. soldiers only opened fire after the car ignored the warnings.

    Fini, however, said the car was traveling no faster than 25 mph, and disputed the U.S. military’s assertion that several warnings were given. He said the U.S. government must conduct a thorough investigation, “that responsibilities be pinpointed, and, where found, that the culprits be punished.”

    Okay, so we’ve established with some degree of certainty the vehicle was traveling somewhere over a 75+ mph range. I’m sure that’s a clue somehow. Oh yeah, it’s a clue that Sgrena’s a liar, as she’s on record as saying the driver had almost lost control. And perhaps Fini can explain why he wants to punish the “culprits” of an admitted accident.

    Meanwhile, pictures of the car have been released that cast further doubts on Sgrena’s tale of an “avalanche of gunfire” from the American’s so-called ambush. Dr. Rusty Shackleford, on the story at the Jawa Report since the beginning, has them and links to a solid collection of other blogs’ postings on the matter.

  • Rabin’s Killer Denied Conjugal Visits

    Sometimes, being an assassin is hard.

    The Israeli Supreme Court on Monday rejected a request by Yitzhak Rabin’s assassin to have conjugal visits with the woman he says he married by proxy.

    Yigal Amir, who is serving a life term for the Nov. 4, 1995, killing of the prime minister, had sought permission to have conjugal visits with Larisa Trimbobler.

    In its ruling, which upheld a lower court decision, the Supreme Court said that Amir has not abandoned his violent aims, has shown no remorse and has become a role model for extremists. It also said it would be difficult to supervise such visits.

    Trimbobler and Amir, both Orthodox Jews, insist they were married secretly over the phone by a rabbi last year. But rabbis and the Israel Prisons Service dispute the claim, saying the wedding was not valid under Jewish law because Amir was not joined by two witnesses.

    Prison officials have barred him from consummating the marriage with Trimbobler, a divorced mother of four who fell in love with Amir while he was in prison.

    “This entire affair is an example of sadistic maltreatment of us. They can kill us but they can’t separate us,” Trimbobler told Army Radio.

    Amir, an ultranationalist Jew, said he killed Rabin to stop the handover of land in Israeli-Palestinian peace deals and has shown no regret. The assassination was a major blow to peace efforts.

    Israeli authorities have grown increasingly concerned about extremists as the government prepares to pull out of the Gaza Strip and four West Bank settlements this summer.

    Although a rare occurrence, killers who experience an erection for more than four hours should seek immediate medical attention.

  • Ex-hostage Disputes U.S. Account of Shooting

    Much has been made in the media and the blogosphere of the release of Italian journalist Giuliana Sgrena and her subsequent wounding at a Baghdad checkpoint by U.S. forces. Itailian security agent Nicola Calipari was killed in the incident.

    Since the day Sgrena was kidnapped, Dr. Rusty Shackleford at the Jawa Report predicted her release and said he felt something was “fishy” about the whole story. He has repeatedly written about the Sgrena affair and today blogs his mounting suspicions about the story.

    Doesn’t this whole incident seem more than a little odd?

    Sgena was kidnapped by her admitted friends in Iraq.

    She was kidnapped while on the phone with another journalist.

    A tape was released of her begging Italy to cave to the terrorists demands of pulling Italian troops out of Iraq the day before the Italian Senate was to vote on that very issue.

    On the tape Sgrena appears to tell the ‘terrorist’ holding the camera to stop. He follows her order as if she is directing.

    The tape came exactly two-weeks after she was captured.

    One month to the day after her abduction she is released.

    On the day of her release her car speeds toward a US checkpoint, fails to stop when ordered, fails to heed warning shots, and the car is ultimately fired upon.

    In the end, who looks like the bad guys? The terrorists? The jihadis? The ‘insurgents’? No, the US.

    Today, CNN carries Sgrena’s tale. Sgrena, who writes for the communist Il Manifesto, disputes the U.S. version of the story.

    […]Giuliana Sgrena wrote, “Our car was driving slowly,” and “the Americans fired without motive.”

    She described a “rain of fire and bullets” in the incident.

    The U.S. military said Sgrena’s car rapidly approached a checkpoint Friday night, and those inside ignored repeated warnings to stop.

    Troops used arm signals and flashing white lights, fired warning shots in front of the car, and shot into the engine block when the driver did not stop, the military said in a statement.

    But in an interview with Italy’s La 7 Television, the 56-year-old journalist said “there was no bright light, no signal.”

    Apparently, however, Sgrena cannot keep her story straight, as the very next paragraph shows she told an Italian government official a different tale.

    And Italian magistrate Franco Ionta said Sgrena reported the incident was not at a checkpoint, but rather that the shots came from “a patrol that shot as soon as they lit us up with a spotlight.”

    Well, Ms. Sgrena, was there a light or wasn’t there?

    In an interview with Sky TV, Sgrena said “feeling yourself covered with avalanche of gunfire from a tank that is beside you, that did not give you any warning that it was about to attack if we did not stop — this is absolutely inconceivable even in normal situations, even if they hadn’t known that we were there, that we were supposed to come through.”

    So now it was a tank away from a checkpoint that lit up the car? Folks, I’m not buying a word this woman says.

  • Man Allegedly Tried to Sell Spy Names

    Another bad guy caught?

    A federal grand jury has indicted an Indiana man on charges he tried to sell names of U.S. intelligence operatives in Iraq to Saddam Hussein’s government before the U.S. invasion.

    Shaaban Hafiz Ahmad Ali Shaaban, 52, was charged with agreeing to act as a foreign agent for Iraq and with immigration violations, federal prosecutors said Thursday following Shaaban’s arrest.

    Shaaban traveled in late 2002 from Chicago to Baghdad, where he agreed to sell the names of U.S. intelligence agents to Saddam’s government for $3 million, said Susan Brooks, the U.S. attorney for southern Indiana. The Iraqi government paid for the trip, the indictment alleges.

    “The deal was never consummated,” Brooks said.

    Shaaban sought the names from foreign sources, but investigators believe he never obtained them, Brooks said. Investigators believe Shaaban acted alone.

    […]

    Brooks said she could not discuss what sparked the federal investigation of Shaaban, a resident of Greenfield, which is about 20 miles east of Indianapolis.

    The federal indictment unsealed Thursday also alleges Shaaban sought to broadcast pro-Iraqi propaganda in the United States and offered to pay Iraqis who agreed to act as “human shields” to protect infrastructure from coalition forces, Brooks said.

    Authorities believe that Shaaban is originally from Jordan and became a U.S. citizen illegally in 2000 when he used the alias Shaaban Hafed on his naturalization application. If convicted of that charge, he most likely will be deported, Brooks said.

    If Shaaban Hafiz Ahmad Ali Shaaban illegally became an American citizen under the name Shaaban Hafed and he’s found guilty of these acts, then I suggest we hang “Mr. Hafed” for treason and then deport Mr. Shaaban. In a box.

  • AP Analysis: Iraq Conflict a Grim Experience

    Four hostile newspapers are more to be feared than a thousand bayonets.

    —Napoleon Bonaparte

    And Napoleon knew that without ever having to deal with the Associated Press, source to thousands of papers.

    Here are the words of AP writer Tom Raum as he looks at the situation in Iraq in about as negative light as possible. Granted, he managed to avoid terms like “quagmire” and “baby-killers” but he probably had to work hard at it in his defeatist reporting.

    The conflict in Iraq can be told in numbers and milestones, from the more than 1,500 troops who now have died to the number of weapons of mass destruction found — zero.

    Two American soldiers died in Baghdad of injuries from a roadside bomb and another was killed in Babil province south of Baghdad, the military said on Thursday. That brought to 1,502 the number of U.S. troops who have died since President Bush launched the invasion in March 2003, according to an AP count.

    There are other milestones, other important numbers, some reached, some soon to be, as the conflict in Iraq nears its third year.

    • Roughly 60,000 National Guard and Reserve troops are deployed in Iraq. As of Wednesday, 300 had died there since the war began.
    • May 1 will be the second anniversary of Bush’s “mission accomplished” aircraft carrier speech in which he announced an end to major combat operations.
    • The price tag is over $300 billion and climbing, including $81.9 more just requested from Congress. The money also covers operations in Afghanistan and the broader war on terror, but the bulk is for Iraq.

    Conspicuously missing from this list are the successes, such as the January elections (tucked into the piece later), the capture of Saddam and the bulk of his henchmen, the dominant offensive in Fallujah, itself practically unprecedented in urban warfare. I guess successful accomplishments cannot be considered milestones.

    When Lawrence Lindsey, then chairman of Bush’s National Economic Council, predicted in September 2002 that the cost of war with Iraq could range from $100 billion to $200 billion, the White House openly contradicted him and said the figure was far too high. He was eased out in a shake-up of Bush’s economic team.

    “Americans need to take note of these sorts of milestones because it’s a way to show respect for the sacrifices of troops and reassess strategy,” said Michael O’Hanlon, a foreign policy analyst with the Brookings Institution.

    “But I’m much more interested in trends,” he added, citing indications pointing to the relative strength of the insurgency and whether violence is declining or increasing.

    On that, the signs are mixed.

    The top U.S. general in the region said that about 3,500 insurgents took part in election day violence in Iraq on Jan. 30, citing estimates from field commanders. Army Gen. John P. Abizaid suggested the failure to prevent millions of Iraqis from voting showed the insurgency was losing potency.

    “They threw their whole force at us, we think, and yet they were unable to disrupt the elections because people wanted to vote,” Abizaid told the Senate Armed Services Committee this week.

    But his comments came just a day after one of the biggest attacks by insurgents since the fall of Saddam Hussein’s government in April 2003. A suicide car bombing in the town of Hillah killed at least 125 people, including dozens of recruits for Iraq’s security forces.

    From Jan. 1 until Iraq’s election day, 234 people were killed and 429 people were injured in at least 55 incidents, according to an AP count. Casualties rose in February, with 38 incidents resulting in at least 311 deaths and 433 injuries.

    Why point out that civilian casualties rose in February without pointing out that U.S. military casualties fell? Especially after focusing on those casualties? Why not point out that those same civilian casualties, while every one an individual tragedy, happened in the month after the terrorist bastards promised and failed to make the streets run with blood? Oh yeah, it’s all about the negative. My bad.

    Meanwhile, the United States is losing some partners in its “coalition of the willing.”

    Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko announced this week that Ukraine would withdraw its 1,650-strong military contingent by October. Poland is withdrawing about a third of its 2,400 troops. Last year, Spain’s new Socialist government withdrew its 1,300 troops.

    At the same time, Bush drew commitments during his visit to Europe last week from all 26 NATO countries for contributions to NATO’s training of Iraqi security forces — either inside or outside Iraq or in cash.

    Even harsh war critic France will send one officer to help mission coordination at NATO headquarters in Belgium and has separately offered to train 1,500 Iraqi military police in Qatar.

    Wow, thanks, France. You pervs.

    More than half of Americans remain convinced of the importance of keeping U.S. troops in Iraq until the situation has stabilized, though polls suggest widespread doubts about the handling of the war and Iraq’s prospects. An AP-Ipsos poll in February found that 42 percent approved of the president’s handling of Iraq, while 57 percent disapproved. A slight majority in recent AP-Ipsos polling expressed doubts that a stable Iraq can be established.

    How the hell could support not erode with this kind of reporting? Yell that the sky is falling often enough and people look up and question the clouds.

    Another milestone will come the day Iraq’s security forces are sufficiently trained and equipped to deal with the insurgency — and to permit the United States to begin leaving.

    There have been conflicting reports on this, too.

    The administration says there are 140,000 “trained and equipped” Iraqi military, security and police officers.

    But Anthony Cordesman, a military expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, puts the number of Iraqi troops able to stand up to serious insurgent attack at fewer than 20,000.

    Why are the administration’s words slipped into question-implying quotes (without sourcing) but “military expert” “Anthony Cordesman” can state what is essentially an “opinion” and it is written as a fact?

    “Everything we do in Iraq will fail unless we develop a convincing plan to create Iraqi forces” able to defend their country without U.S. help, Cordesman said.

    Sen. Carl Levin of Michigan, senior Democrat on the Armed Services Committee, said some administration documents suggest that there are no more than about 40,000 trained Iraq forces and that they are lightly equipped.

    “We’ve been given wildly different numbers of these security forces,” Levin complained to Abizaid.

    “Senator, the big question doesn’t really have to do with numbers; the question has to do with institution building,” Abizaid responded. “I remind you … that institution building takes a long time.”

    “I agree,” Levin said. “But we shouldn’t kid ourselves as to how long it does take.”

    No balance from a supportive senator? Of course not, as the piece only pretended at a hint of balance all along.

    I find it most telling that the AP felt obligated to justify Mr. Raum:

    EDITOR’S NOTE — Tom Raum has covered national and international affairs for The Associated Press since 1973.

    Tommy, you’re a sorry bastard. I bet you’ve chafed these many years, knowing how close you were to being able to write this defeatist crap after Tet.

  • Gadhafi Wants Libya, U.S. to Be Friends

    Dear ol’ Moammar Gadhafi — a nutjob dictator with the occasional good points, trying to position himself and Libya into a leadership role in the Arab world. Now he wants to buddy up to the U.S. Maybe. And denounce the UN. But work with it. Oh yeah, foreign terrorism is bad.

    Moammar Gadhafi said Wednesday he wants Libya and the United States to be friends, but the one-time international pariah slammed the United Nations Security Council for being controlled by a select group of countries.

    In a wide-ranging address to the annual meeting of Libya’s parliament-like General’s People Congress, Gadhafi also warned Libyans not to support foreign extremists and to stand strong in the face of terrorism.

    Gadhafi’s comments, moderate in the main but typically inflammatory in parts, come as Libya returns to the international fold following years of being regarded as a state sponsor of terror.

    “We don’t say love the Americans. We are talking policies, and (on that level) there is no problem or animosity” between both countries, Gadhafi, wearing a white robe, told hundreds of often-cheering Congress members during an address televised live and monitored in Egypt.

    Last year, the U.S. government lifted 23-year-old travel restrictions imposed on Libya, invited American companies to return to the oil-rich nation and encouraged Tripoli to open a diplomatic office in Washington. President Bush has also commended Libya’s progress in scrapping its nuclear weapons.

    Of the United States, Gadhafi said: “We are not enemies. We are not allies. We are not agents. We hope one day we will be friends.”

    Gadhafi, however, criticized the United Nations and the permanent five-member Security Council, repeating complaints he raised in a full-page advertisement that appeared in Wednesday’s Guardian newspaper in England.

    “They are suggesting to expand the Security Council. This is another attempt to fool the nations at the expense of international peace and security,” Gadhafi said during his speech in Sirte, a coastal city 260 miles east of Tripoli.

    Okay, so I can find common ground with him on the UN being little more than a pit of jackholes these days. I have to begrudgingly give him that point.

    Despite his criticism, Gadhafi said Libya has applied for a seat on an expanded Security Council, which he wants to rotate among African states.

    The United Nations had imposed sanctions against Libya, but the Security Council removed them last year after Tripoli accepted responsibility for the 1988 bombing of a Pan Am jetliner over Lockerbie, Scotland, and agreed to compensate families of the 270 victims.

    Gadhafi said his country must now take a lead role in combatting terrorism and warned Libyans that if their sons join extremists fighting U.S. forces in Iraq, they will eventually return home to kill their parents for being “infidels.”

    “A country that is weak in front of terrorism harms the international community,” he said, while suggesting Libyan security forces might be given extra powers.

    “The power that is responsible for security must be strong enough to make people feel safe,” he said without elaborating.

    Libya is known for its extensive security apparatus and highly active internal and external intelligence services, a system that neighboring Egypt helped install in the early 1970s. Most Libyan opposition members live abroad because of the country’s heavy handed security.

    Mix this buddy-buddy talk with this article where he espouses a desire for greater Libyan freedom and we start to see my case for the nutjob criteria.

    Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi urged his people on Wednesday to let “freedoms blossom” but made no mention of democratic goals like political parties that the United States wants to promote in the Middle East.

    […]

    “You have to let freedoms blossom. People must have the full freedom to chose useful and fruitful work, the full freedom to learn and carry out scientific search and the freedom of faith,” said Gaddafi, who came to power in a 1969 military coup, in a speech broadcast live on Libyan television.

    […]

    “Every one has the full economic freedom of what to do and where to invest. Every one has the freedom to establish social and economic enterprises of his liking and interest,” said Gaddafi, shunning mention of Western-style democracy.

    […]

    “The people power and the direct democracy in Libya came to give an alternative to the worsening political crisis in the world where everywhere outside Libya dictatorship rules,” he declared.

    Gaddafi said the people of the United States, Britain and Italy were living “under the yoke of dictatorships” and invited their politicians, scholars and intellectuals to visit Libya to learn how “the only genuine democracy works.”

    “It is an international duty of the Libyans to help resolve the world political crisis. I advise you to set aside the money to pay for accommodation and other expenses for people we invite to come from America, Britain and other countries to learn at Green Book university.”

    Ummmm … we need to chat about freedom, democracy, dictatorships and the different meanings those words apparently hold to you an me, Moammar-baby.

    Look, it’s obvious he’s decided to emerge from retreat after his spanking by Reagan, sensing a chance to again become a leading figure for the Arab world. Good luck with that, Moe — you’re at least better than some of the other cluelessness running around in that area.

    I do want one bold statement from the guy: how do we spell his name in English … consistently and correctly? These two articles had two variations, and here’s several more.