Libia şi Moralitatea Naţiunilor

    29

    Ştirile din Libia se precipită, ca încă o etapă deloc neglijabilă din dominoul răscoalelor arabe. Sursele ne năpădesc din toate părţile, imaginile de groază încep să devină banale.

    În Libia se pare că se realizează scenariul pe care l-am prezentat ca o posibilitate în capitolul egiptean cumva încheiat deocamdată: răsculaţii, cu ajutorul unor unităţi ale armatei au preluat controlul asupra unei părţi din ţară. Cirenaica şi Benghazi s-au eliberat, au devenit un teritoriu în care autoritatea dictatorului nu se mai exercită. Capitala Tripoli este şi ea scenă de razboi civil.

    Dictatorul Gaddafi, în dorinţa-i naturală de a-şi păstra puterea în numele islamului şi a poporului care desigur că nu stie ce vrea, a măcelărit sute de oameni, în general neînarmaţi, iar măcelul continuă.
    Oamenii au fost mitraliaţi la întâmplare din elicoptere sau de pe sol, ucişi cu proiectile antitanc şi cu alte mijloace neletale de împrăştiere a demonstraţiilor… Au fost şi sunt folosite trupe de mercenari aduse din Zimbabwe şi alte ţări luminate din Organizaţia Ţărilor Africane patronată de Gaddafi, ca ajutor unui frate in nevoie. Iar dictatura nu se jeneaza nici pe plan declarativ. Fiul dictatorului, Saif al-Islam Gaddafi (Sabia Islamului, ce nume liniştitor şi simbolic) a decis să scoată (abia acum?) milităria din pod şi a promis printre altele că dacă răsculatţii vor continua, va fi razboi civil (acuma e altceva?) şi că nu se vor deplânge doar 84 sau 200 de victime ci multe mii, pe străzi vor curge râuri de sânge, iar tatăl său Muammar va lupta până la ultimul om (personal l-aş sfătui să înceapă cu ultimul om, recte el însuşi…).
    Dar în toată această zarvă un lucru nu s-a băgat de seamă. Unde este glasul nobilei Organizaţii a Naţiunilor Unite? Unde este dreptul ei strigăt de protest, unde e mânia dreaptă a naţiunilor pline de moralitate?
    Aaa, au probleme mult mai grave la permanenta lor ordine de zi. ONU are trasată sarcina să se ocupe de condamnarea Israelului pentru faptul că construieşte pe teritoriile ce le administrează, în locuri în care arabilor nu le convine. Repet, pentru că construieşte. Şi chiar atunci, exact în timpul măcelului din Bengazi, Consiliul de Securitate a discutat furtunos problema, iar pentru că rezoluţia n-a trecut, urmează ca cele aproape 200 de naţiuni ale Adunării Generale să dezbată îndelung şi în profunzime problema şi să-i mai ardă Israelului o condamnare, pentru îndeplinirea planului de condamnări de pe agendă. În vitrutea moralităţii şi a justei ordini a priorităţilor. Pentru că se construieşte…

    Sursa 1
    Sursa 2
    Sursa 3
    Sursa 4

    Print Friendly, PDF & Email

    29 COMENTARII

    1. Corneliu, cred ca nu ar strica sa ne uitam un pic la cine sunt oponentii lui Gaddaffi. Revoltele au izbucnit in Benghazi, un centru islamist, asa ca nu prea avem motive sa ne revoltam… Stim doar ca se omoara. Cine pe cine, cand si de ce – nu. Stim ca Gaddaffi este un dictator care va face orice sa nu scape din mana fraiele puterii, dar mai stim si ca tara e plina de destui descreierati care abia asteapta sa scape de el pentu a se putea dezlantui. A nu se trece cu vederea atacurile comise impotriva strainilor. Daca cineva poate restabili ordinea pe acolo, ala e tocmai Gaddaffi.

    2. Vlad, n-am nicio indoiala in privinta celor care genereaza revoltele acolo. Libia e compusa dintr-o multitudine de populatii si triburi care nu prea au multe in comun inafara islamului si, destul de partial, limbii arabe. Granitele Libiei sunt stabilite dupa cele ale fostei colonii a Italiei, adica atat cat au putut ea stapani in acord cu alte puteri coloniale. Iar triburile n-au nicio constiinta de grup care s-o depaseasca pe cea a propriului trib si tot ceeace e in afara lui le este prin definitie dusman.
      Nimeni nu s-a ridicat acolo in numele fantomei propagandistice denumita “democratie” pentruca nimeni nu stie bine ce e si ce poate fi ea in regie proprie…
      Este pur si simplu un vant de nebunie colectiva bantuind lumea araba, care s-ar putea sa produca efecte de durata, dar nu democratie.
      Chiar daca Gaddafi personal nu va reusi sa faca ordine dupa traditia locului, desigur ca va reusi un alt dictator, sau mai multi, in cazul dezmembrarii Libiei.
      In aceste conditii este posibila o anarhie sangeroasa care nu se va termina repede si care, din cauza petrolului, va afecta economia mondiala.
      Iar natiunile lumii pline de indoielnica moralitate vor reactiona doar dupa masura in care le va afecta propria bunastare.

    3. Vlad, Corneliu

      Cunoștințele personale despre Libia fiind precare, am gugălit intens, ce-am găsit arată clar că afirmația

      Este pur si simplu un vant de nebunie colectiva bantuind lumea araba

      e corectă, am informații similare despre state vecine și prEtene! Zicea cineva pe blog de tribalismul populațiilor revoluționare: sînt convins că e mai mult decît adevărat, numai idioții utili dar INTERESAȚI cum ar fi Obama & tribul progresist pot da cu flit susținînd de pildă că țăranii moldoveni din vremea lui Cuza erau foarte interesați de multiculturalism, mai ales că toate babele de la vîrsta de la 35 în sus purtau basmale! 🙂

    4. Fara indoiala ca preotii orbi ai democratiei cu orice pret vor continua sa cante in cor imnul eliberarii popoarelor de tiranie, popoare care dintotdeauna a visat la democratie, chiar si inca pe cand se pregateau sa coboare din copaci. Vor denumi evenimentele de azi ca pe durerile facerii apoteoticei democratii.
      Candva, parca, altii sustineau ca dintotdeauna popoarele visau la comunism, nu-i asa?

      Dar sa ne actualizam:
      Se anunta ca dupa inchiderea totala a spatiului Libiei atat pentru transporturile aeriene (pana si unui avion de pasageri libian i s-a refuzat intoarcerea) cat si pentru orice mijloc de comunicatie, nazdravanul dictator a adus noi trupe de mercenari cu prevederi foarte precise in contract. Fiecare va primi 500 de dolari pe zi, iar pentru fiecare dusman al poporului, lichidat (si desigur bine dovedit) va primi 12.000 de dolari. Nu-i rau de loc. Caci au mai ramas libieni de macelarit si mai ales inca 1000 de miliarde de dolari (asta e cifra) in rezerva valutara a visteriei libiene…
      Iar Organizatia Natiunilor Unite, in inalta sa moralitate, nu considera inca problema suficient de grava pentru a se intruni. Interesant.

    5. Update.
      Si totusi Natiunile Lumii, in inalta lor moralitate, se misca:

      Consiliul de Securitate al ONU se va reuni marti pentru a discuta despre criza din Libia. Anuntul a fost facut de secretarul general al Natiunilor Unite, Ban Ki-moon, citat de France Presse. Responsabilul ONU a declarat ca a avut o discutie de aproximativ 40 de minute cu liderul libian Muammar Gaddafi, caruia i-a spus sa dea dovada de mai multa retinere.
      “L-am indemnat sa respecte total drepturile omului, libertatea de intrunire si exprimare” – a declarat Ban Ki-moon, cu putin timp inainte de a participa la un eveniment la Los Angeles.

      Cata delicatete, cata simtire: “L-am indemnat sa respecte…”
      Da, l-a indemnat…
      Haide tovarase Gaddafi, te indemn sa respecti…

    6. de la Gates of Vienna, o imagine de ansamblu..

      Momentous events are underway in the Middle East. The situation is changing so rapidly that there is no time to catch one’s breath between batches of gruesome and astonishing news dispatches.

      The most rapid changes are occurring in Libya. The protests there got off to a late start compared with the rest of the Maghreb, but the Libyan insurrection raced ahead of the pack very quickly. Thousands of demonstrators took to streets and have been mercilessly attacked by police and military units. Protesters have reportedly been machine-gunned and strafed by aircraft, and at least several hundred are dead.

      Despite the brutal crackdown by the authorities, the rebels have seized control of several cities, including Benghazi. They are also gaining strength in the capital, Tripoli, and have burned the parliament building. An undetermined number of army units have defected to protesters, and a number of Libyan diplomats abroad have resigned in solidarity with the dissidents. Several military aircraft were flown to Malta to keep them from being used by the regime.

      Four major tribes are said to have gone over to the rebellion, and they are threatening to cut off the oil supply lines. BP has closed down its operations in Libya for the time being, and the country’s economy is in free fall. Stock markets in southern Europe in which Libyan holdings are prominent have taken the biggest hit, but all European markets are down.

      Col. Moammar Ghadafi and his sons are expressing absolute defiance towards the protesters, and have promised rivers of blood and a full-scale civil war if the insurrectionists don’t back down. As of the time of writing, a Saharan Ragnarok seems all but unavoidable.

      We are at one of the hinges of history, so what is the Obama administration doing?

      Well, it’s doing what it does best: “expressing concern”, “calling for restraint on both sides”, “urging the Libyan government not to react with violence”, etc. If none of these stern measures has the desired effect, then it will “continue to monitor the situation closely”.

      Si un colaj de reportaje despre situatia din Yemen, Libia, Iran, etc

      inevitabilul se produce, si nu se putea intimpla intr-un moment mai prost.. cind obama e presedintele americii. lumea va arata complet diferit foarte curind.

    7. Vad acum la tv mercenarii prinsi in Libia – cetateni din diverse state africane, din Maroc pina in Zimbabwe, care au primit de la Gadafi 2000 USD de caciula pentru a lupta contra civililor libieni. In Iran 1500 de hezbalisti lupta cot la cot cu odiosul regim contra demonstrantilor. Demonstratiile de dupa alegerile din Iran au fost domolite cu ajutorul palestinienior printre altele sau mai bine zis si pentru altii. Cind s-au dus sa bata iranieni au uitat ca de fapt Israelul ii tie sub ocupatie si sub cheie.

      Tin minte ca in 1989 se spunea sau zvonea ca nea caisa adusese mercenari libieni. Poti sa stii?

      E vorba de acelasi gen de regim odios, ticalos, criminal, regim dictatorial, faraonic, dispus sa traga din tancuri, elicoptere, de pe acoperisuri, in cetateni, civili neinarmati, care s-au saturat sa fie tinuti sub calcii si ies in strada sa demonstreze. Aceiasi conducatori degenerati si corupti, gen Gadafi, Ahmadingadong, Sadam Hussein, ceasca al nostru de trista reputatie. Cine stie daca se rastoarna regimul in Iran ce vom vedea la stiri, palatele si bogatiile luate cu japca de ayatule si de Ahmadinajad, care altfel se imbraca modest, cu vesnica lui jantirlica.

    8. Este posibil sa nu fie o coincidenta faptul ca revolutiile din Orientul Mijlociu au loc in aceasta perioada. Dupa doi ani, Obama a fost bine cantarit si masurat. Aceasta administratie este ideala pentru facilitarea schimbarii radicale a configuratiei de putere in Orientul Mijlociu.

    9. Gaddafi si tot clanul lui trebuie sa dispara. Sunt o cloaca abjecta. In acelasi timp, jihadistii au o buna intelegere a situatiei si sunt capabili sa profite de revolta impotriva regimului.
      Obama este paralizat si cu totul impotent. Jocul asta geostrategic il depaseste complet.

      MEMRI’s Jihad and Terrorism Threat Monitor just finished a review of what the online forums and websites of Islamist organizations are saying about the situation in Libya. The main jihadi forums such as Shumukh Al-Islam include comments and responses in various forms:

      1. Members commenting on news from various news channels — for example, a member reposting news from Al-Arabiyya about European forces moving on to the shores of Libya. Other members responded by saying that NATO is planning to get involved in containing the situation.

      2. A constantly updated topic, where a member, for example, starts a thread under the name of “situation in Libya”: Such threads provide members the opportunity to give “live” feedback about the situation, either from being personally in Libya or via contacts, friends, and family members from that region. A similar thread that was opened two days ago has already generated 67 entire pages of responses (in comparison, a typical Osama bin Laden video generates about 15 to 20 pages of responses/comments).

      3. Threats to countries attempting to get involved in Libya (in support of Gaddafi). One example would be a member threatening retaliation against Italy, if it decides to get involved in what’s happening in Libya, and another suggesting that a call for help be directed to their Egyptian brothers, who recently had their own successful uprising.

      4. Calls to various jihadi organizations to take action on Libya — for example, a call by a member to the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) to get “involved.” Members responding to the topic said that LIFG had already declared its allegiance to al-Qaeda (meaning, it should be an AQ involvement). Other members called for jihad in Libya.

      The general sentiment is anti-Gaddafi and against the current Libyan regime. There are numerous calls to overthrow Gaddafi, and to support those who died so far during the protests. There are also suggestions on how to overcome the general media blackout in Libya, including the use of certain Internet servers that are not being blocked and censored by the government.

    10. orice guvern care incepe foc de voie impotriva propriilor cetateni trebuie sa dispara; asta e un point of no return

      am vazut zilele trecute o comparatie cu sahul iranului – situatiile nu sint comparabile; tradarea lui carter nu a fost in 79, ci cu un an inainte, in 78; leftistii si islamistii pornisera demostratii violente, atentate (spre ex, au omorit citeva sute de persoane intr-un cinema pentru ca vedeau filme americane care daunau la morala); sahul a interzis miscarile de strada si voia sa pedepseasca faptasii; carter si ‘implementatorii’ acordului de la helsinki l-au presat sa revina si sa permita demonstratiile in continuare; de acolo violenta a escaladat (in primul rind, din partea demonstrantilor, care au cistigat astfel curaj – remember sfirsitul anilor 60 in vest?)

    11. David Pryce-Jones:

      Gaddafi Has Two Choices

      Put yourself in the position of Moammar Gaddafi. For years you have been enjoying doing whatever you like with the total wealth of the country, stashing it away by buying large share-holdings in Italian and German companies. Billions and billions more dollars are available in the oil reserves. Western oil companies queue up to give you this unearned wealth and the power to do mischief that goes with it. Meanwhile you have brought up your sons with the idea that they are going to succeed you, and founded a Gaddafi dynasty to enjoy this money. There is nobody and nothing that counts in the country except you and your sons. In fact it isn’t really a country at all, just a bunch of tribes that you have been careful to leave disorganized and stuck in the old ways.

      You have interfered successfully abroad by supporting Irish terrorists, Robert Mugabe in Zimbabwe and other African dictators, killing Westerners by bombing planes and nightclubs. The United States has accepted blood money for American citizens you murdered. Sen. John McCain called you “an interesting man” and Tony Blair is happy to give you multiple embraces and photo-ops. The United Nations elected your Libya to the Human Rights Council.

      Whatever you do, then, has never had any bad consequences for you. The tiny number of men with the capacity and will to challenge you are dead or in exile. In 1996 you had the opposition cleared away by murdering about 1,200 political prisoners in Abu Salim prison. And now suddenly, all because of a lack of dictatorial discipline in Tunisia and Egypt, a bunch of people are out in your streets, shouting against you and wanting all the wonderful things you’ve reserved for yourself and your sons. In the same position, the feeble Ben Ali in Tunis and the sick Mubarak in Cairo threw their hand in. The alternative is to fly in African mercenaries (just in case the local security forces hesitate to obey your orders) and open fire on what you think is a rabble from tribes you have always despised anyhow.

      Nobody knows how many hundreds, perhaps thousands, have already been gunned down in Libya, or how many more will be. Once you have shown that you are capable of killing 1,200 men in prison, you are a committed criminal and will certainly go as deep into further crime as you think fit.

      Speaking for myself now, I think that Gaddafi is unlikely to slip out of the country like other Arab dictators. It is a case of kill or be killed. Whatever happens, the harm he has done Libya will extend. Either he reasserts himself through superior violence and punishes everyone he suspects of being behind the uprising, or he is himself somehow left for dead. In the latter case, there is no successor, no institution to assume the role of governance, and the horrors of anarchy are the sole prospect.

    12. @12, Israelianca: iunie 2009: “Channel One TV din Israel a afirmat ca un oficial american i-a spus marti lui Netanyahu in Ierusalim: “Vom schimba lumea. Va rog, nu ne stati in cale”. Consilierii lui Netanyahu ar fi interpretat declaratia ca “pe o amenintare”.

    13. Eu nu cred in civili libieni, iar dintre mai multe bande, o prefer pe aia pe care o cunosc. Gaddafi e previzibil, aialalti nu, asa ca, din punctul meu de vedere, Gaddafi poate foarte bine sa ramana la putere. Si asa, in locul lui vor veni alti probabil mai tampiti. Va reamintesc ca Benghazi era un centru islamist si ca buna parte din cei eliberati saptamana trecuta erau tot islamisti. De asemenea, va atrag atentia ca atacurile la adresa strainilor nu sunt intamplatoare. Atacatorii sunt din opozitia anti-Gaddafi, iar daca cineva isi imagineaza ca daca niste musulmani din Bangladesh au patit ce au patit, aialalti o vor duce mai bine, se inseala amarnic.

    14. S-ar putea sa asistam la o ofensiva a miscarilor islamiste , nu neaparat coordonata de un centru , pe baza unei aliante si strategii comune , dar fara indoiala cu vant din pupa asigurat de la Washington . Cred ca, interventia lui bugsy ( @16 ) este binevenita si are mult miez . Oricum , este doar o supozitie pentru ca, amploarea evenimentelor depaseste cred si capacitatea de analiza si prognoza a unui serviciu secret . Ce cred ca este sigur , este faptul ca ” Incendiul ” nu s-a declansat din senin , de la o tigara aruncata intimplator .

    15. israelianca @12, bugsy @16 Din păcate cred că aveți dreptate amîndoi! calehari @18 Păi Obambi a recunoscut că nu se poate lăsa de fumat, dar n-a menționat unde aruncă chiștoacele…

    16. Bugsy #16
      In caz ca stirea de la Chanel 1 Israel a existat asa cum e citata, nu miroase a bine. Daca Obama avea intentia sa schimbe lumea in bine, propozitia nu avea sens. De ce sa-i stea Netanyiahu in cale?
      Parca si mie imi rasuna si-mi amintesc prin ceata de asa o propozitie. Ma mira ca nu am stat atunci sa rumeg paradoxul. Poate interpretam in termenii: : Obama vrea sa aduca pace in lume care dupa el poate fi impiedicata de Israel, daca nu e destul de darnica in tratativele cu Palestienii, sa accepte impartirea Ierusalimului primind ramasite, granite mai reduse pentru Israel, sa permita mai multi refugiati, chestii de-astea.
      Unde ai gasit stirea, Bugsy?

      Israelianca #12
      Din purtarea lui, Obama pare ca cel putin nu se opune la ce se intimpla (in orice caz in Egypt era clar pro). Dar nu am observat sa zica ferm “Pentru democratie adevarata DA, care sa promoveze libertatea omului, insa NU la aducerea extremismului islamic la putere”.

      Nu o fi chiar asa de cretin Obama. Cred ca am mai intrebat o data: Ce are nevoie de Islamisti si Jihadisti puternici pe cap, ii ingreuneaza conducerea la Casa Alba, isi perecliteaza simpatia americanilor si viitoarele alegeri. Si nici simpatia Jihadistilor nu e vizibila, cel putin nu pe fata, auzim aceleasi declaratii potrivnice. Excluzind ca e complet timpit sau naiv de crapa, inseamna ca e srintit? Sau se simte musulman si e pentru Califat? Poate fi?!

    17. calehari,

      o ofensiva a miscarilor islamiste , nu neaparat coordonata de un centru , pe baza unei aliante si strategii comune

      pai asta e jihad, nu?

      Silvapro,

      Nu o fi chiar asa de cretin Obama.

      Nu, bineinteles ca nu, n-avem noi norocul asta. Situatia pare sa fie mult mai grava.

      In 5 nov. 2008 am publicat urmatorul comentariu:

      Va place mistica?

      Obama and Ahmadinejad

      Amir Taheri in Forbes, 26 octombrie, 2008

      Is Barack Obama the “promised warrior” coming to help the Hidden Imam of Shiite Muslims conquer the world?

      The question has made the rounds in Iran since last month, when a pro-government Web site published a Hadith (or tradition) from a Shiite text of the 17th century. The tradition comes from Bahar al-Anvar (meaning Oceans of Light) by Mullah Majlisi, a magnum opus in 132 volumes and the basis of modern Shiite Islam.

      According to the tradition, Imam Ali Ibn Abi-Talib (the prophet’s cousin and son-in-law) prophesied that at the End of Times and just before the return of the Mahdi, the Ultimate Saviour, a “tall black man will assume the reins of government in the West.” Commanding “the strongest army on earth,” the new ruler in the West will carry “a clear sign” from the third imam, whose name was Hussein Ibn Ali. The tradition concludes: “Shiites should have no doubt that he is with us.”

      In a curious coincidence Obama’s first and second names–Barack Hussein–mean “the blessing of Hussein” in Arabic and Persian. His family name, Obama, written in the Persian alphabet, reads O Ba Ma, which means “he is with us,” the magic formula in Majlisi’s tradition.

      Mystical reasons aside, the Khomeinist establishment sees Obama’s rise as another sign of the West’s decline and the triumph of Islam. Obama’s promise to seek unconditional talks with the Islamic Republic is cited as a sign that the U.S. is ready to admit defeat. Obama’s position could mean abandoning three resolutions passed by the United Nations Security Council setting conditions that Iran should meet to avoid sanctions. Seeking unconditional talks with the Khomeinists also means an admission of moral equivalence between the U.S. and the Islamic Republic. It would imply an end to the description by the U.S. of the regime as a “systematic violator of human rights.”

      Obama has abandoned claims by all U.S. administrations in the past 30 years that Iran is “a state sponsor of terrorism.” Instead, he uses the term “violent groups” to describe Iran-financed outfits such as Hamas and Hezbollah.

      Obama has also promised to attend a summit of the Organization of the Islamic Conference within the first 100 days of his presidency. Such a move would please the mullahs, who have always demanded that Islam be treated differently, and that Muslim nations act as a bloc in dealings with Infidel nations.

      Obama’s election would boost President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s chances of winning a second term next June. Ahmadinejad’s entourage claim that his “steadfastness in resisting the American Great Satan” was a factor in helping Obama defeat “hardliners” such as Hillary Clinton and, later, it hopes, John McCain.

      “President Ahmadinejad has taught Americans a lesson,” says Hassan Abbasi, a “strategic adviser” to the Iranian president. “This is why they are now choosing someone who understands Iran’s power.” The Iranian leader’s entourage also point out that Obama copied his campaign slogan “Yes, We Can” from Ahmadinejad’s “We Can,” used four years ago.

      A number of Khomeinist officials have indicated their preference for Obama over McCain, who is regarded as an “enemy of Islam.” A Foreign Ministry spokesman says Iran does not wish to dictate the choice of the Americans but finds Obama “a better choice for everyone.” Ali Larijani, Speaker of the Islamic Majlis, Iran’s ersatz parliament, has gone further by saying the Islamic Republic “prefers to see Barack Obama in the White House” next year.

      Tehran’s penchant for Obama, reflected in the official media, increased when the Illinois senator chose Joseph Biden as his vice-presidential running mate. Biden was an early supporter of the Khomeinist revolution in 1978-1979 and, for the past 30 years, has been a consistent advocate of recognizing the Islamic Republic as a regional power. He has close ties with Khomeinist lobbyists in the U.S. and has always voted against sanctions on Iran.

      Ahmadinejad has described the U.S. as a “sunset” (ofuli) power as opposed to Islam, which he says is a “sunrise” (toluee) power. Last summer, he inaugurated an international conference called World Without America–attended by anti-Americans from all over the world, including the U.S.

      Seen from Tehran, Obama’s election would demoralize the U.S. armed forces by casting doubt on their victories in Iraq and Afghanistan, if not actually transforming them into defeat. American retreat from the Middle East under Obama would enable the Islamic Republic to pursue hegemony of the region. Tehran is especially interested in dominating Iraq, thus consolidating a new position that extends its power to the Mediterranean through Syria and Lebanon.

      During the World Without America conference, several speakers speculated that Obama would show “understanding of Muslim grievances” with regard to Palestine. Ahmadinejad hopes to persuade a future President Obama to adopt the “Iranian solution for Palestine,” which aims at creating a single state in which Jews would quickly become a minority.

      Judging by anecdotal evidence and the buzz among Iranian bloggers, while the ruling Khomeinists favor Obama, the mass of Iranians regard (and dislike) the Democrat candidate as an appeaser of the mullahs. Iran, along with Israel, is the only country in the Middle East where the United States remains popular. An Obama presidency, perceived as friendly to the oppressive regime in Tehran, may change that.

      Amir Taheri is the author of 10 books on Iran, the Middle East and Islam. His new book The Persian Night: Iran Under the Khomeinist Revolution will be published by Encounter Books in November.

    18. Stimati colegi, comentariile sunt la locul lor, dar deocamdata un update cu semnificatii noi.
      Insfarsit Consiliul de Securitate s-a miscat. A condamnat. O condamnare fara dinti.
      Caci nu vad masuri de sanctionare din partea nobilei organizatii, nici embargo, nici vreo comisie de cercetare a genocidului in curs si nici, fereasca Dumnezeu, vreun Tribunal International, ca in cazul lui Hariri.
      Iar cel care aplica acum sanctiuni lumii este tocmai Gadafi. Livrarea petrolului a fost oprita (de fapt si datorita fugii personalului occidental al companiilor petroliere).
      Prognoza?
      Pe vremea lui Ceasca, oamenii hatri obisnuiau sa spuna:
      “Foaie verde de dudau
      O sa fie si mai … bine.”

    19. De ce actioneaza Obama asa? Posibile raspunsuri aici, de la Caroline Glick: http://www.jewishworldreview.com/0211/glick022211.php3

      concluzia ei: “IN ALL these scenarios, America’s strategic interests will be placed in jeopardy. But presently, it is far from clear that the Obama administration recognizes that these are the consequences of the policies it adopted.

      Then there is Saudi Arabia. By supporting the anti- Mubarak forces in Egypt and the Iranian-backed demonstrators in Bahrain and Yemen, the administration has destroyed the US alliance with the Saudis.

      This may or may not be a positive development.

      Saudi Arabia has been one of the most radicalizing forces in the Middle East at the same time that it has been the steady engine behind the world’s oil economy.

      Nevertheless, it’s unlikely that the current US government recognizes either that it has taken place, or that it has taken place in large measure as a consequence of its behavior.

      From an Israeli perspective, whether motivated by an animus towards Israel or extraordinary incompetence, the Obama administration’s Middle East policies offer one message: We can only rely on ourselves and so we’d better strengthen ourselves as much as possible as quickly as possible in every possible way.”

    20. Obama News:

      The American people extend our deepest condolences to the families and loved ones to all who have been killed and injured. The suffering and bloodshed is outrageous and it is unacceptable. So are threats and orders to shoot peaceful protesters and further punish the people of Libya.

      Insfarsit. Cat de miscator.

      President Barack Obama on Wednesday strongly condemned Libyan government-sanctioned violence against demonstrators, and said the United States is stepping up international consultations on how to deal with the situation.

      Aveti putintica rabdare…

    21. Pentru ca tot discutam aici despre Obama (cine si ce e, ce motive are, dupa ce se ghideaza), am gasit un comentariu interesant, care are relevanta si la postajul on-topic – Libia. De aceea imi permit sa atrag atentia la cometariul # 14 lui Costin A, de sub “Jocul de-a mortea”
      Articolul in intregime “Obama’s mystery links to Gadhafi uncovered”:
      http://www.wnd.com/index.php/index.php?pageId=267361

      Qaddafi has Been Tied to Rev. Jeremiah Wright – Rev. Wright

      As pressure mounts on the White House to intervene to stop Moammar Gadhafi’s bloody crackdown in Libya, many commentators have been wondering why Barack Obama has been cautious in his criticism of the dictator after the U.S. president so fervently supported the removal from office of U.S. ally Hosni Mubarak of Egypt.

      But Gadhafi has been tied to Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Obama’s spiritual adviser for more than 23 years.

      The Libyan dictator also has financed and strongly supported the Nation of Islam and its leader, Louis Farrakhan. Obama has ties to Farrakhan and his controversial group. Read more at wnd.com.

      Qaddafi: Barack Obama Is Friend

      By Roee Nahmias

      Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi considers the US president a blessing to the Muslim world. In a speech published in London-based al-Hayat newspaper on Saturday, Gaddafi praised Barack Obama, called him a “friend” and said there is no longer any dispute between his country and the US.

      He said, “Now, ruling America is a black man from our continent, an African from Arab descent, from Muslim descent, and this is something we never imagined – that from Reagan we would get to Barakeh Obama.”

    LĂSAȚI UN MESAJ

    Please enter your comment!
    Please enter your name here