Skip to comments.Gadhafi's youngest son, grandkids killed in NATO attack
Posted on 04/30/2011 5:58:31 PM PDT by BerryDingle
TRIPOLI, Libya Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi survived a NATO missile strike Saturday that killed his youngest son and three grandchildren and wounded friends and relatives, Libya's spokesman said.
Gadhafi and his wife were in the Tripoli house of son Saif al-Arab Gadhafi, 29, when it was hit by at least one missile fired by a NATO warplane, according to Libyan spokesman Moussa Ibrahim.
Libyan officials took journalists to the one-story house in a wealthy residential neighborhood. Some areas of the roof were caved in, leaving strings of reinforcing steel hanging down among chunks of concrete.
(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.msn.com ...
This was a NATO attack, a NATO attack, A NATO ATTACK!
The Obamedia will go to great pains to stress that repeatedly over the Sunday talk shows.
>>>But the guy in the White House didn’t ask me, and we’re off to war again. We need to fight it like a war. That is, we need to break lots of stuff, and kill people. Including children (but not targeting children).>>>
“My country right or wrong.” Absurd rationalizations such as this resulted in people getting executed at Nuremberg.
“Clear and Present Danger”
Someone better kill him now, and the rest of the clan too
Revenge is nasty in that culture, as PanAm 103 showed
We need to remember, too, that this is the party line from Libya.
For all those taking it as gospel, do you really think that the muslims wouldn’t lie about this? That it’s cold hard fact?
Maybe it did happen.
Maybe it didn’t.
We are talking about a country, culture and religion/political system (Islam) that train their ‘children’ from birth to hate/kill infidels ‘wherever they may be found’.
Remember also the ‘children’ of Vietnam who regularly took part in the killing of American soldiers.
With this historical FACT as a guide, they should all be presumed a lethal threat until proven otherwise, solely because they are. To not do so on our part is insanity and begging for our own death.
We have become America the pussified. No, no one in a civilized society ‘wants’ or ‘enjoys’ the death of children, but when dealing with Islamic garbage that trains it’s children to kill, which they do, one must either fight the enemy in all it’s forms or surrender to it. Not one American life should be lost, or placed in danger out of a misplaced sense of morality.
And no, I do not think we should be there, but thanks to Lord Steve, we are. Now we HAVE to deal with it, like it or not.
All of this is making me sick. The press and their double standard, our lying cheating, traitorous POS Marxist President, and the fact we have FReepers here condoning the murder of innocent children. These kids weren’t caught in a battle or a bomb gone wrong. We targeted and murdered those children. We aren’t even fighting a war in Libya for C___st’s sake. In fact we aren’t fighting a war anywhere. I don’t think anybody has a GD clue what we’re doing other than going to hell in a hand basket.
It's up to the civilians that run the military to determine where we go to war.
I don't this is a just or proper war. I don't think we have a dog in the fight.
But if we're going to tread in bloody water, I want our guys to be the biggest, baddest, meanest SOBs out there.
And I want every one of our guys back right this minute. That's not going to happen. So, realistically, the next best thing is to give them carte blanche. And pull them out quickly, since this is an immoral war.
Reagan retaliated for German nightclub bombing that killed US serviceman
He did not retaliate for Lockerbie/PanAm 103. I believe Bush 41 had just won the US presidency a month before Lockerbie ... so it happened (conveniently) as the watch was changing
As far as I know, NO ONE ever retaliated for Lockerbie
As if the uS accepted the deaths of all those people over guilt for the USS Vincennes downing the Iranian Airbus 4 months earlier...
oh wait, that would make Iranian mullahs a co-conspirator player, wouldn’t it? We don’t want to deal with that...after all, the Iranian moderates are just waiting to come into power...so our experts have been saying since 1975
Why is it that they don't worry about children getting killed, but go out of their way in Afghanistan to have our soldiers unarmed?
Reagan lobbed a cruise through his front door - killing one of his daughters.
Bush played hard ball and got him to give up his WMD's and help with capturing and turning in Al Queda - who Qaddafi considers his deadly enemies too. Qaddafi was quiet and compliant compared to most of the ME countries over there. This is NOT the country we should be going into war with with all the real fires in the region.
and if you think this has ANYthing to do with Lockerbie, you are either naive or think we are.
obama is conducting an illegal war with no mandate from the U.S. And he quickly went way beyond the 'no fly' mandate he got from the UN. they have NO RIGHT to be destroying that country and NO MANDATE to target Qaddafi for assassination...and certainly no right to be killing children.
We have made a deadly enemy out of someone who was keeping his country stable in the middle of a powder keg.
And who are we propping up? They even admit they don't know (well, they do, but...we'll all just keep ignoring all the reports about the al Queada there.)
obama says he had to go in because Qaddafi was 'going to' slaughter his people. And who were the 'people' he was fighting that gave obama this cover story?
they were al Queda criminals that, upon release from prison terms, attacked a police station, killed policemen and confiscated weapons which they used to continue attacts. Qaddafi went after them.
so why are we there? Beside the goal to turn yet another friendly ME country over to the Muslim Brotherhood and al Queada?
Think on this: Qaddafi has billions in gold - physical gold. Unlike Mobarak and others, he doesn't have his gold in Swiss banks or anywhere else but in Libya.
As far as Italy and France? They want to be sure that liquid gold that flows under the sea from Libya to Italy doesn't dry up.
You think obama doesn't plan to put our troops on the ground there - and to hell with what we think?
Remember when Gates said, recently in congress when asked if we'd put boots on the ground? He said: "Not on MY watch!"
I said: "He just signed his 'resignation letter."
And indeed - now he's being replaced by Panetta - who's hitched at the hip with Obama.
So I surmise you are either totally uninformed of the realities (and we don't have half the picture) - or are deliberately trying to obfuscate what is going on, thinkig we are as clueless as obama thinks we are, not that he doesn't have reason to so think - after all, he was elected.
Better be watching the other hand - while he's got us busy clucking over th so-called release of his long form - and knowing the world and the news would be dominated for a few days with THE WEDDING, he puts in a lap dog that well may put boots on the ground. You really think we need to be in another war? (We've already lost a good friend of the family over there - there should not be ONE of our soldiers lives put in harms way for this phony war.) NOT ONE. Are you watching?
Lockerbie - meh. Like obama gives a rats behind about that - that was only white folk.
Good luck telling God you weren’t responsible for your own evil acts “cuz you were just takin’ orders”.
Lockerbie was slap back for the nightclub bombing slap back. It's hard to keep track without a program in front of you.
Our so-called leaders are MORAL COWARDS. They don't lance the boil of Iran, but flail about elsewhere.
My concern is for my brothers in arms. I've been there, done that, still have t-shirts.
My policy is that civilians control the military. And that when the military is invoked, they should be allowed to slip the leash.
You should see me on abortion threads, I'm obnoxious. All life is precious to me. Especially children. Which is why war should be entered into very carefully. Because children will be killed. Or left homeless, or parentless.
Our leaders suck. It's our fault. Kids got killed.
What Qaddafi has done in the past has NOT ONE THING to do with why obama is plunging us into this.
Nor has it one thing do with the phony protestations of bama in preventing 'slaughter.'
Wherever else we might have done to Qaddafi should have been done long ago - not when the whole ME is on fire, ready to explode at any moment.
going after the 2 more stable and quiet of the ME countries - Egypt and Libya - is insanity.
But not from the perspective of those who want to turn those two heretofore stable countries over to the control of militant Muslims.
He DOES intend to send our soldiers in there. How many of our troops are you willing to sacrifice on obama's illegal, unnecessary and convoluted war?
But war is serious business. People, including children, die. And worse. And there is worse than dying.
Our leaders suck. That is our fault. We really need to fix that problem.
That's an easy question. None.
It is unjust and counter to our interests.
Our leadership sucks. It's our fault. We need to fix that problem.
Killing kids is OK if Obama approves it. Just ask the MSM.
Yea on this one I am too. Also Afghanistan and Iraq, it’s time to bring our troops home. We’ve spilled enough blood, no more.
Well then, we damn well better get on it fast.
Just WHY do you think obama has just replaced Gates with Panetta?
You remember, Gates - who testified in congress when asked if we would put boots on the ground, said "Not on MY watch!."
I said: "He just signed his 'resignation letter."
And now he's out - replaced by obama's hitched at the hip pal, Panetta.
You don't want mission creep? You don't want boots on the ground?
Better get vocal fast.
And y'all better be watching the other hand.
Do I sound angry?
Damn straight. I've already lost a good family friend over there. And if he puts boots on the ground, my grandson, who grew up in my home and who has done two brutal long tours in the 'ghan, is poised to be among the first boots.
Did I say 'angry." Make the FURIOUS.
“Maybe it did happen.
Maybe it didnt.”
I’m betting didn’t!
“Maybe it did happen.
Maybe it didnt.”
I’m betting didn’t!
I always know I’m dealing with a skilled debater when he retorts with the moronic and childish “newbie” insult.
You are right. This whole thing is a “CF” gone wrong. It is unamerican and morally reprehensible. There is no excuse, no reason for the United States of America to be killing innocents. If they want to kill Khadaffi then kill effing Khadaffi. You do not have to target and blow up his whole family.
Nothing good will come from this. We have been led into this unfortunate escapade by an ignorant, incompetent fool who has ceded the sovereignty of the United States to the United Nations. This is how we have found ourselves in a no win situation with no real plan of action and no exit strategy. Look for this to go from bad to worse and end really badly. Barack Obama has brought this country to the brink of moral bankruptcy with his misguided Marxist beliefs. I feel physically sick as I watch him destroy everything that is good and right and honorable about the United States of America.
The Congress of the United States should be drawing up Articles of Impeachment on Barack Obama. He took the direction of the United Nations and went to war agains’t another country without the approval of Congress. He has arrogantly declared that he will not need the advice and consent of Congress to continue with his misadventures in Libya. He is unfit for command and needs to be removed from office. Two more years of this and we will not exist any longer.
It reminds me of all those *weddings* the US was accused of bombing.
Gadhafi survived a NATO missile strike Saturday that killed his youngest son and three grandchildren and wounded friends and relativesWell, we can all sleep sound in the knowledge that NATO isn't trying to assassinate Gadhafi -- it's satisfied with the murder of his children and grandchildren.
You just showed up in the middle of the end of the conversation.
As far a skilled rhetoric goes, you have not refuted that:
a) Our leadership sucks.
b) It's our(American's) fault.
c)That we need to change it.
Another Obama war crime.
The incompetent Obama has led us into a rogue war.....and it will turn out badly for us because he and his amoral thug advisors have no idea what the hell they're doing.
Some Islam terrorists from anywhere will now target Obama and his children.....plus the families of other Western leaders.
This is why heads of state are normally not targets of deliberate assassination....nor are innocent child relatives of same. There will be horrible repercussions, mark my words....especially from any or all Arab cultures who put an abnormal value on male children.
I would think that somebodys grandchildren died in Lockerbie.
I understand what youre saying here, and I could care less about Gadhafi or his family, but NATO isnt bombing Libya to retaliate for Lockerbie.
Probably the most cogitative, accurate, detailed response on the war against Libya I have read to date.
The Obama Empire war machine goes into action for the illustrious Pirate in Chief.
The Rat lamented "Evil Empire" has become a self fulfilling prophecy.
We are so screwed.
As for doing something, I talk to everyone that I can, one on one, and the ignorance is startling and frightening. I constantly call and email the NBC (no balls congresscritters).
My husband lost a cousin in Afghanistan a couple of years ago. Sorry for your loss. What do we do about ignorant stupid people--the ones who elected Obama. They are the main problem--sheep following the bleating of the media. If the media had vetted the O he would have only gotten the black vote.
There is no reason for this?? Has the foreign policy of the USA gone “mad”? We aren’t exactly fighting NAZI Germany here..
Ghadafi was hiding behind his own child and grandchildren...that’s the way they do it....should have used a bigger bomb......we killed no one, he did.
AS for the black vote he got - From what one of my sons, a long hauler who criss crosses the country up and down, back and forth, every week - and talking to black folk everywhere, he has lost a lot of them. They are disgusted.
And listen to THIS black leader - who has the ability to reach and influence millions of blacks - he lays obama out in lavender - and he says he will likely not get more than 70 of the black this time. That's a big drop.
an interview with Laura Ingraham - she starts out a bit antagonistic to him, but she learns some things she was unaware of.
I'm still hanging on to hope - REAL hope.
For more on this man, here's a video of him telling “Call me senator” Boxer off royally. She's actually quite dismissive of him and treat him as though he's ignorant. Her mistake.
If anyone was killed at all. Whenever we do hit an important building in the Middle East, it's always somehow connected to small children or infants, like Saddam's baby formula factory.
With your blind and unthinking support of Hussein, you might very well say, “Barack Hussein Obama mmm mmm mmm.” This is a criminal war waged by the European socialists who want to grab others’ property and Hussein is helping them.
“So now suddenly were not afraid of offending Muslims?”
as long as it is muslims whose governments will be replaced by something more theological and even more anti-west. Rabidly anti-west governments (iran and syria) need not worry, this doesn’t apply to them. Pro-western governments (egypt) will be toppled as soon as possible to allow more radical groups into power. Apparently the saudis directly shielded baharain and their king was very annoyed at obama for actively lobbying for the ouster of mubarak.
in other words - us ally - obama tries to topple
non-us-ally that doesn’t like al qaeda, muslim brhd, etc., also try to get rid of
us enemy - no problem, won’t criticize even the most egregious actions against civilians.
Not directed at you, but a person has to be blind not to see the pattern here.
“Bush played hard ball and got him to give up his WMD’s and help with capturing and turning in Al Queda - who Qaddafi considers his deadly enemies too. Qaddafi was quiet and compliant compared to most of the ME countries over there. This is NOT the country we should be going into war with with all the real fires in the region.”
it isn’t accidental, obama is actively trying to topple regimes in the middle east that are adversarial towards radical islamic movements. the betrayal of mubarak is going to have serious and negative permanent implications for US relations and policy in the region no matter who is president next.
“a) Our leadership sucks.
b) It’s our(American’s) fault.”
the variable in the equation here is the influence the media has with a high % of the voting population. Many of us are very familiar with details of current events and politics (thanks to sites like this), and some others are howling at the moon and hating capitalism on DU, but an awful lot of folks are getting their news from networks, cnn, AP/NYT/gannett, and live in a world where all information is direct from the ministry of truth.
We aren’t going to turn the country into a fully-informed populace, so the media’s ability to mold public perception and opinion has been the trump card and continues to be.
It is a very serious structural problem to which I don’t see a likely positive resolution in a peacetime context.
WTH did you get that idea? What I think of him would get me banned from here.
Is there any doubt that a republican would have been called a war criminal for this? I don’t really give a crap about Libya, but it does boggle the mind that Obama got a peace prize and Bush got 7 years of peace protestors and a 24/7 negative news cycle to go with it.
This makes me ill.
The “North Atlantic” Treaty Organization - keeping Islam secure from Southern Europe to North Africa. An institution which has outlived its usefulness.
This is a war crime. Where are all the leftists who usually scream about such things from the Criminal Court of the Hague?
The same place they were when Clinton murdered the janitor at the Sudanese aspirin factory. The New World Order - foaled by a voodoo Republican, ridden by the Utopian Internationale.
“it isnt accidental, obama is actively trying to topple regimes in the middle east that are adversarial towards radical islamic movements. the betrayal of mubarak is going to have serious and negative permanent implications for US relations and policy in the region no matter who is president next.”
Precisely. The absolute silence when the Iranian government was slaughtering the Iranian civilians in the street proves it. The United States under the Barrack Hussein Obama administration favors whichever is the most retrograde, violent Islam faction in any intra-Islamic conflict, anywhere. So simple even a community organizer can understand it. Confuses the hell out of neo-cons though.
I wonder if Michelle is proud of her America tonight?
Actually, and it is a long time ago, and I'm only relying on my memory, but Sunday TImes published a series of articles showing that it was Syria (possibly in collusion with Iran) that had perpetrated the bombing of PanAm103.
For a while there Syria was in the haircross, but then Syria became a valued ally in the first Gulf war, and soon after Bush Sr (and State) decided to make history with yet another failed Middle East peace plan - the Madrid meeting. And suddenly, no more mention of Syrian involvement in Lockerbie - it was all Libya and Qadafhi.
What a surprise!
(Sorry for the long quote that follows, but it is worth reading I think.)
In the first three years following the bombing, before a shred of evidence had been produced to incriminate Libya, the Dumfries and Galloway police, the FBI and several other intelligence services around the world all shared the belief that the Lockerbie bombers belonged to the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine General Command (PFLP-GC), a Palestinian rejectionist organisation backed by Iran. The PFLP-GC is headed by Ahmed Jibril, a former Syrian army captain; its headquarters are in Damascus and it is closely allied with the Syrian president and other senior Syrian officials. In the 1970s and 1980s the PFLP-GC carried out a number of raids against Israel, including a novel hang-glider assault launched from inside Lebanon. Lawyers, intelligence services and diplomats around the world continue to suspect that Jibril who has even boasted that he is responsible was behind Lockerbie.
The case against Jibril and his gang is well established. It runs like this: in July 1988, five months before the Lockerbie bombing, a US naval commander aboard USS Vincennes in the Persian Gulf shot down an Iranian airbus, apparently mistaking it for an attacker. On board Iran Air Flight 655 were 270 pilgrims en route to Mecca. Ayatollah Khomeini vowed the skies would rain blood in revenge and offered a $10 million reward to anyone who obtained justice for Iran. The suggestion is that the PFLP-GC was commissioned to undertake a retaliatory bombing. Other evidence has emerged showing that the bomb could have been placed on the plane at Frankfurt airport, a possibility that the prosecution in al-Megrahis trial consistently ruled out (their case depended on the suitcase containing the bomb having been transferred from a connecting flight from Malta). Most significantly, German federal police have provided financial records showing that on 23 December 1988, two days after the bombing, the Iranian government deposited £5.9 million into a Swiss bank account that belonged to the arrested members of the PFLP-GC.
The decision to steer the investigation away from the PFLP-GC and in the direction of Libya came in the run-up to the first Gulf War, as America was looking to rally a coalition to liberate Kuwait and was calling for support from Iran and Syria. Syria subsequently joined the UN forces. Quietly, the evidence incriminating Jibril, so painstakingly sifted from the debris, was binned.