Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

What Gaddafi’s Death Teaches the Middle East…And Should Teach the West
Pajamas Media ^ | Barry Rubin

Posted on 10/22/2011 7:31:30 PM PDT by ventanax5

Remember a peculiar fact: even though Gaddafi was generally a horribly repressive anti-American dictator, in his final years he tried making a deal with the Americans. Gaddafi was frightened by the U.S. attack on Iraq in 2003 and didn’t want to be next on the list. So he cooperated, gave up his nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction programs, and reduced his foreign subversive efforts.

That did not save him from being overthrown by the United States, just as it did not save a genuine American ally, President Hosni Mubarak in Egypt. On this point, I’m not advocating anything about what the United States should have done in Libya but just observing how it will be received in the region.

Bashing the West in the current era brings little cost. Here’s a partial list:

Egypt: Obama courts Muslim Brotherhood and is indifferent to anti-Americanism of the newly empowered political forces

(Excerpt) Read more at pajamasmedia.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: gaddafi; wot

1 posted on 10/22/2011 7:31:33 PM PDT by ventanax5
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: ventanax5
Our economy suffers because of the unpredictability of the Obama regime.
Our foreign policy suffers from the unpredictability of the Obama regime.

You are our friend? We might still help to overthrow you.
You are our enemy? We might still help to overthrow you.

We ignore laws. We ignore treaties and agreements. We're not loyal or logical. WE'RE CRAZY! You just never know what we might do.

2 posted on 10/22/2011 7:35:15 PM PDT by ClearCase_guy (I won't vote for Romney. I won't vote for Perry.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy
WE'RE CRAZY!

Ain't that the truth.

3 posted on 10/22/2011 7:37:45 PM PDT by FlingWingFlyer (Stop Government Greed Now!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ventanax5

That was my whole beef. There are a LOT of tyrants out there. But Khaddaffi was scared of us. I have no idea just WHAT we were trying to accomplish with handing Lybia over to the MB. Bad man dead. Great. But what next? And if we pull out of Iraq completely, it will be very soon for them to revert to an Islamist hell-hole. What the hell is Obama’s thinking behind these moves?


4 posted on 10/22/2011 7:37:57 PM PDT by boop ("Let's just say they'll be satisfied with LESS"... Ming the Merciless)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: boop
From "Unforgiven":

Boy: "I guess he had it comin', huh?"
Eastwood: "We all got it comin', kid."

The world is full of bad men, and you could say that they all deserve to die. And they will -- there is no escaping judgment. But the logic of taking out Gadaffy is really hard to grasp.

5 posted on 10/22/2011 7:46:02 PM PDT by ClearCase_guy (I won't vote for Romney. I won't vote for Perry.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: boop

You really want to know?
Obama is working to destabilize the middle east resulting in a global war that will wreck the U.S. Economy.
He has no other plan.


6 posted on 10/22/2011 7:46:08 PM PDT by 9422WMR
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: ventanax5

All you have to remember is what we did to our ally South Vietnam.

We assassinated their President, then abandoned them to the North Vietnamese in spite of our treaty with them.

Both actions thanks to the Dems.


7 posted on 10/22/2011 7:48:31 PM PDT by <1/1,000,000th%
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ventanax5

All I see is Libya becoming the next truck stop for al-Qeada.


8 posted on 10/22/2011 7:50:46 PM PDT by jmacusa (Political correctness is cultural Marxism. I'm not a Marxist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ventanax5; All
This is a good point.

There was a similar one that was made by the Clinton regime in Bosnia: No matter what the treaties say, the only way to keep the U.S. from messing with you is your ownership of nuclear weapons.

NATO broke its charter rules to involve itself in the Balkan mini-wars. This taught the entire world that the written treaties involving NATO and the U.S. were worthless. Only nuclear weapons ownership could guarantee that you would not be interfered with.

The world looks at Iran, North Korea, heck, even Pakistan, and then at Libya, Iraq, and Afghanistan. The lesson has been clear.

9 posted on 10/22/2011 7:58:16 PM PDT by marktwain (In an age of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ventanax5

This communist son of a whore is responsible for thousands of shoulder fired AA missiles falling into the hands of his fellow muzzie subhuman animals.

Every commercial jet that is shot down by one of these is blood on his hands.

This nation also made a deal with Qaddafi that if he dropped his nuke program and paid reparations to the victims of the Pan Am 103, we would take him off the terrorist list and let him be.

The degenerate monster in the WH is out to put radical islamists in charge of every stable country in the Mideast, and let them take back all of the territory paid for with American blood in Iraq and Afghanistan.

And I bet not one of the GOP candidates will even bring this up.

Libya Is Off U.S. Terrorist List

By KIRIT RADIA (@KiritRadia_ABC)
May 15, 2006

After spending more than a quarter-century on the United States’ State Sponsor of Terrorism list, Libya has finally completed its journey back into the relative good graces of the U.S. government.

The State Department announced today that it would remove Libya from the list in 45 days as part of a three-pronged process of normalizing U.S.-Libyan relations, declaring that Libya was “out of the terrorism business.”

In a statement announcing the restoration of full diplomatic relations, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Libya was being rewarded for its “renunciation of terrorism and the excellent cooperation Libya has provided to the United States” in the war on terror. Libya has, in recent years, shared intelligence with the U.S. government that has helped track terrorist networks, including al Qaeda.

The re-establishment of diplomatic relations and the removal of sanctions is also seen as a reward for Libya’s surprising dismantling of its nuclear weapons program in 2003. The announcement comes at a time when the United States is looking to convince two other countries on the State Sponsor of Terrorism list — Iran and North Korea — that cooperating with international demands will ultimately lead to greater gains for their countries.

“Today’s announcement demonstrates that, when countries make a decision to adhere to international norms of behavior, they will reap concrete benefits,” Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs C. David Welch said.

The United States will also reopen its embassy in Tripoli, Libya’s capital, for the first time since the building was set aflame by a mob and closed in 1979. The United States withdrew its last ambassador in 1972, but withdrew its remaining personnel from the embassy after the attack. Less than two years later, Libyan diplomats were expelled from Washington.

Libya will also be removed from another list: countries not cooperating with the U.S. war on terror. Venezuela was added to this list today, with the State Department citing the country’s ties to Cuba and Iran. The decision means that the United States will ban arms sales to Venezuela, whose leader, Hugo Chavez, has been an outspoken critic of U.S. foreign policy.

Removal from these two lists will mean that Libya will no longer be subject to restrictions on U.S. foreign assistance, a ban on arms sales, certain export controls, and other financial sanctions.

The State Department sought to reassure those who remained unsure about the decision to re-establish diplomatic ties with Libya. “This was not a decision that we arrived at without carefully monitoring and assessing Libya’s behavior,” Welch said.

“The relevant U.S. government agencies conducted a thorough review of Libyan conduct since 2003,” he said, citing Libya’s having distanced itself from terrorist organizations with which it once had maintained relations.

Scars From Pan Am Flight 103 Linger

The State Department said today’s announcement did not indicate the United States had resolved its other concerns about Libya.

“Instead, these steps will enable us to engage with Libyans more effectively on all issues,” Welch said. “In particular, we continue to call upon Libya to improve its human rights record and to address in good faith cases pending in U.S. courts with regard to its terrorist activities of the 1980s.”

After the mob attack on the U.S. embassy in 1979, U.S.-Libyan relations deteriorated further as the United States accused Libya of supporting several terrorist bombings. Most notable among these were the 1986 bombing of a discotheque in West Berlin frequented by American soldiers that killed three people, including two American service officers, and an explosion aboard Pan Am Flight 103 that brought the plane down over Lockerbie, Scotland, in 1988 — killing 270 people, most of whom were American.

The Libyan government reached a settlement with the crash victims’ families in 2002, to which the United States government was not a party, in which it agreed to pay $2.7 billion, or $10 million per family, in monetary compensation for the attack.

Of that settlement, $4 million was paid to each family after the United Nations removed sanctions on Libya, and an additional $4 million was paid to each after the United States removed additional sanctions. The remaining $2 million was to be paid when Washington removed Libya from its State Sponsor of Terrorism list. The timeline for this decision, however, expired in February 2005, and the money, which had been held in a Swiss escrow account, has since been removed.

The announcement on Libya was met with mixed emotions by the families of the crash victims.

Jim Kreindler, the attorney representing 130 of the 270 victims’ families during negotiations with the Libyan government, spoke with many of the families today. He told ABC News that some were pleased that Libya had taken steps to reform itself and ensure that no more lives would be lost as a result of its actions. Others, he said, still maintained bitter feelings toward Libya and especially its leader, Moammar Ghadafi, saying that he should be imprisoned.

Now that Libya has been removed from the State Sponsor of Terrorism list, under the original agreement Libya is to pay the remaining $2 million to each family. It remains to be seen if this agreement will still be honored since the escrow account has expired.

“We have continually expressed to the Libyans that whenever the secretary of state offers findings that Libya will come off the list, that Libya should put the money back into the escrow account and then indicate that it’ll abide by the agreement,” Kreindler said.


10 posted on 10/22/2011 8:00:38 PM PDT by Rome2000 (OBAMA IS A COMMUNIST CRYPTO-MUSLIM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: boop
What the hell is Obama’s thinking behind these moves?

1. How to get re-elected in 2012.

2. And, at the same time, how to advance the Caliphate.

He certainly wasn't thinking about the best interests of the United States.

11 posted on 10/22/2011 8:04:30 PM PDT by okie01 (THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA: Ignorance On Parade)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: ventanax5
The way is being cleared for a complete take over of North Africa and the Middle East by militant muslims, with the goal of establishing a muslim theocracy under one rule in the region. The holdouts are being systematically eliminated, with help from the obama administration. His true colors are really beginning to show.
12 posted on 10/22/2011 8:04:30 PM PDT by factoryrat (We are the producers, the creators. Grow it, mine it, build it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ventanax5

The obummer goal, same as the demorats, destroy the Jewish state.


13 posted on 10/22/2011 8:07:36 PM PDT by org.whodat (Just another heartless American, hated by Perry and his fellow demorats.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ventanax5

We had an agreement with him and we broke it!


14 posted on 10/22/2011 8:16:23 PM PDT by Stepan12
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


15 posted on 10/22/2011 8:22:30 PM PDT by RedMDer (Forward With Confidence!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: ventanax5

I’m not one of those boo-hooing today over Qaddafi getting rough justice from people he terrorized for 40 years, but here’s a pro tip: Laughing your way through a “veni vidi vici” joke while the rest of the planet is wincing at this isn’t a classic demonstration of “smart power.” In fact, pretty much any joke about death while the deceased is bleeding from his head into the ground is probably a bad bet if you happen to be chief diplomat for the world’s greatest military power. If you want to send a “let that be a lesson to you” message, send it earnestly and tactfully. As it is, if this had been Dubya instead of the Democrats’ heir apparent, the outrageous outrage would shake the very ground we trod upon.
In fairness to Hillary, though, the left’s newfound hawkish glee isn’t limited to her. Timothy Carney’s keeping an eye on Twitter:
Pictured here is a tweet from liberal blogger Markos, of the Daily Kos. It reads: “GOPers who criticized Obama’s approach in Libya … wrong again.”
The implication: If you objected to the President for illegally entering a war where vital U.S. interests were not at stake, you were wrong, because we killed Gadafhi. More briefly: Might makes right.
The liberal Center for American Progress made the same unliberal argument in August when Gadhafi lost control of the country, asking on twitter: “Does John Boehner still believe U.S. military operations in Libya are illegal?”…

http://hotair.com/archives/2011/10/20/hillary-on-qaddafi-we-came-we-saw-he-died/


16 posted on 10/22/2011 8:22:54 PM PDT by Calusa (The pump don't work cause the vandals took the handles. Quoth Bob Dylan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: <1/1,000,000th%
The same damn thing happened after Desert Storm. The Kuwaitis and Iraqis that supported our efforts were slaughtered as we departed. I expect another Islamic bloodbath in Iraq as the Shia Iranian sympathizers clean up the remaining Sunnis in Iraq. Any remaining Christians will be cleaned up as well. They are wiping them out in Egypt following the MB takeover.
17 posted on 10/22/2011 8:25:47 PM PDT by Myrddin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy

“But the logic of taking out Gadaffy is really hard to grasp.”

I disagree. He had become a US asset. US assets were used to destroy US assets. Also, by killing him, it will be a LONG time before wthe US can expect to flip another one to our side, AND this gave weapons, gold and oil production to AQ & MB. Further, this is a precedent for globalist, transnational entities like the UN, ICC and NATO to decide who they will permit to live, and for how long.

Perfect wet dream ecstasy for the likes of Barack Hussein Obama, Hillary Rodham-Clinton and Huma Abedin-Weiner.

The logic is clear, if one accepts the premises of our whole anti-Western and anti-Israel policy in the Washington government.

Double edged though. The ruling elites have now endorsed the violent overthrow and summary execution of unpopular rulers. Tyrants beware what you sow.


18 posted on 10/22/2011 8:30:28 PM PDT by Psalm 144 (Voodoo Republicans: Don't read their lips - watch their hands.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: boop

It does seem strange that Obama chose to depose just
the secular rulers who, obviously, will be replaced by
a more radical muslim leader. Why doesn’t he go after
the real cruel african muslim leaders?


19 posted on 10/22/2011 9:10:49 PM PDT by cliff630
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: okie01

>He certainly wasn’t thinking about the best interests of the United States.<

.
Has he ever?


20 posted on 10/22/2011 9:33:12 PM PDT by 353FMG (Liberalism is Satan's handiwork.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: 353FMG
Has he ever?

Not that I can recall.

21 posted on 10/22/2011 9:38:27 PM PDT by okie01 (THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA: Ignorance On Parade)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: ventanax5

Found these videos. Both are amazing. They are presented by a person VERY UNHAPPY with Obama and his stance with Africa as well as dividing the races to his benefit.
Be patient. Resist the urge to shut it off in the first minute or so.

http://www.google.com/m/url?client=ms-android-hms-tmobile-us&ei=04yjTqjjIKvAsQfDeg&gl=gb&hl=en&q=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v%3DJWG1ayoKnKM&source=android-browser-key&ved=0CBYQuAIwATgK&usg=AFQjCNEA0gBftxjY_peWCTabsJF-ad52Vw

http://www.google.com/m/url?client=ms-android-hms-tmobile-us&ei=rIejTvDFIpPxsQfd0wE&gl=gb&hl=en&q=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v%3D3Bu5wmiFbv4&source=android-browser-key&ved=0CCkQuAIwBzgU&usg=AFQjCNFacFp3FUJBZVgmYCVID2qnRS0nIg


22 posted on 10/22/2011 9:46:26 PM PDT by Donnafrflorida (Thru HIM all things are possible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rome2000
declaring that Libya was “out of the terrorism business.”

We'll see about that.

23 posted on 10/22/2011 11:10:13 PM PDT by Constitutionalist Conservative (Of the declared candidates: (1) Perry, (2) Cain. I'll happily vote for either if he's the nominee.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: cliff630

I was actually thinking about this while I was in the shower this morning. The cards seem to be aligning for a severe world-wide war in the near future, courtesy of yet another democrat administration.


24 posted on 10/22/2011 11:49:03 PM PDT by boop ("Let's just say they'll be satisfied with LESS"... Ming the Merciless)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

Both Clintons are War Criminals “Kosovo and U.S. sponsored terrorists unraveling: war crimes and Hague for Clinton?”
http://moderntokyotimes.com/2011/10/15/kosovo-and-u-s-sponsored-terrorists-unraveling-war-crimes-and-hague-for-clinton/


25 posted on 10/23/2011 12:07:25 AM PDT by iopscusa (El Vaquero. (SC Lowcountry Cowboy))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Calusa

Well put. Had Dubya just started bombing the $hit out of a country, without congressional approval first, with no “follow up plan”, then swaggered all over the place, the libs would have already impeached him. And we will NOT forget liberals saying what Obama did was just fine. It sets a very dangerous precedent that leftists don’t seem to grasp. I’m not sad about Khaddaffi being killed. I just fear the aftermath.


26 posted on 10/23/2011 12:11:00 AM PDT by boop ("Let's just say they'll be satisfied with LESS"... Ming the Merciless)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Donnafrflorida

for later


27 posted on 10/23/2011 1:13:53 AM PDT by heartwood
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: ventanax5
The lesson here is that trying to be a friend with the US is a suicidal move on your part...soon another POTUS will declare you the current enemy.
28 posted on 10/23/2011 1:22:15 AM PDT by crazyhorse691 (Obama is just the symptom of what is destroying the U.S.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: crazyhorse691

I think Gaddafi had plenty to do himself with his downfall. His disastrous socialist policies brought many years of record unemployment and poverty. His favoritism to his tribe left large parts of the country extremely unhappy.


29 posted on 10/23/2011 2:21:08 AM PDT by Krosan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: boop

“I have no idea just WHAT we were trying to accomplish in Lybia”

It was all about the Ooooil, and not even for us. And no Code Pink to be found, then again Bush isn’t President.


30 posted on 10/23/2011 2:45:01 AM PDT by DAC21
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: ventanax5

Under Obama al-Qeada and the muslim brotherhood get The most populated muslim state, an oil rich muslim state, another crack at Iraq and this all comes with tons and tons of armaments. What could go wrong?


31 posted on 10/23/2011 3:03:36 AM PDT by timetostand (Ya say ya wanna revolution -- OK!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Donnafrflorida

bump


32 posted on 10/23/2011 5:09:07 AM PDT by Oratam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: boop

It seems that Obama’s only goal is t create chaos with whatever he touches. There is barely a thing he has tampered with that has made things better.

1. He claimed he wanted to help the economy. It’s now trashed even more, not only here but around the world.

2. He claimed to want to help blacks and minorities but their employment and economic situation has greatly worsened.

3. He claimed to want to stop illegal guns from entering Mexico but in reality he and his administration facilitated it.

4. He wanted to help alternative energy companies but now they are crumbling one after another.

5. He intervenes in country after country only to leave them in worse shape that before.

6. Our enemies hate us worse that before and no longer fear us.

7. Our allies are treated like crap.

8. He has filled our government with people bent on weakening our republic.

These are but a few things. Given that record, the only conclusion is that he is purposely destroying our country with the support of large numbers of the American people.


33 posted on 10/23/2011 5:55:31 AM PDT by Dutch Boy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Dutch Boy
".... the only conclusion is that he is purposely destroying our country with the support of large numbers of the American people."

That was the intention of the bastards that put him in office. Both the parasites that voted for him and those that sponsored[financed] him.

34 posted on 10/23/2011 6:13:26 AM PDT by sport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: ventanax5

Appalled by Qaddafi’s Murder

DIANA writes:

I saw the grisly footage of Qaddafi’s murder on television. I had first to turn off the sound. Then, ashamed, I turned off the television. I have nothing more to say than that I am appalled that my country had anything to do with this grotesque caricature of justice. Actually, to call it a grotesque caricature of justice is to trivialize it. I have no words for it.

I’m not naive and I realize that the U.S. has taken part in assassinations, killings, etc., but there is something about this that simply takes my breath away. I want nothing to do with it. I’m in a complete state of dissociation with our political leaders, Republican and Democrat. I am thoroughly disaffected.

I’m not exactly mourning Qaddafi’s death. He was a very bad man who killed Americans. But what do you do? He seems to have reformed a bit in latter years. He stuck to his treaties and stopped baiting the U.S. He even said a few conciliatory, realistic things about Israel. I’m not saying this turned him into a Good Guy, but it showed he was sane. Now he’s gone and we’re supposed to rejoice? No thank you! Libya will turn to hell.

I do not believe I am alone in feeling so disgusted with just about everything, except my own life, which is going rather well. So I can’t be accused of generalizing my own misery. I am not miserable. Our politics is.

Laura writes:

I am appalled too. The average American seems to accept the media’s pro-democracy fairy tale. Our country took part in the assassination of someone who posed no imminent threat to us and, in doing so, aided avowed enemies. This is not a fairy tale, but a horror story.

— Comments –

Alissa writes:

What goes around, comes around. This fiasco only shows how decadent the West has become. It would be one thing to arrest and kill Qaddafi during the 1970’s-1980’s but not now. For the past years Qaddafi has come around with nuclear disarmament, a weak peace resolution with Israel, weaker links to Islamic terrorists and whatnot. I’m sure the neoconservatives and the feminists are currently cheering about his brutal death. Unfortunately it’s not the Arab Spring and the fall of one man will not bring democracy. It’s the eternal Muslim civil war and one tyrant will be replaced by another. One reaps what one sows.

This is not a fairy tale, but a horror story.

Speaking of horror stories the amount of horror films released per year has increased considerably compared to the past decades. One theory speculates that this is due to family breakdown and the expansion of horror experienced in people’s daily lives.

Lawrence Auster writes:

Commenter Diana is a kindred spirit. I share her feeling that “I’m in a complete state of dissociation with our political leaders, Republican and Democrat [over the death of Kaddafi]. I am thoroughly disaffected.”

However, I have a question for Diana and for Laura: is your disgust directed only at the killing of Kaddafi, or at the entire U.S./NATO intervention in Libya of which is killing was the end result?

My point is that it makes little sense to decry the killing, but not the NATO military intervention that led to the killing. The aim of the intervention was the overthrow of Kaddafi. If he was overthrown, and if he didn’t flee the country, then, given the way these things tend to be done in Muslim countries, his unceremonious murder was a very strong likelihood.

In my view, therefore, if critics of what has happened in Libya want to stand on solid logical and moral ground, they need to denounce the entire intervention, not just the murder of Kaddafi which was the implied and all but inevitable consequence of the intervention.

Laura writes:

Is your disgust directed only at the killing of Kaddafi, or at the entire U.S./NATO intervention in Libya of which is killing was the end result?

No, the intervention itself was deeply wrong. I agree, it’s important to object first and foremost to this illegitimate intrusion into a sovereign nation’s affairs. I recommend the many recent entries at VFR, including this one on Michelle Bachmann’s statement against our involvement in Libya.


35 posted on 10/24/2011 2:13:07 PM PDT by ventanax5
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson