Gadaffi: Our New Friend (Really!?)

1- Attack against America: Striking Washington, the political capital and New York, the economic capital is a horrifying and memorable act. It is intentionally premeditated with forethought insistence and it has rather reached a tenacious scheming to the extent that it was branded by spectacular form.

2- The terrorist action: The first part concerns America as an aggressed over, whatever are justifications of those who committed it.

America as any other states and individuals has the right to defend itself, either in accordance with article 51 of the UN Charter, that is actually inoperative or with else. Right of self-defense is a legitimate matter and America possesses the power enabling it to do so. In this regard, America does not need anybody to defend it, strike its enemy or even get assistance to justify that. It is kind of flattering to show readiness to assist America in a matter concerning it.

The second part: Terrorism this matter does not concern America alone. It concerns the entire world. This needs an international cooperation and international procedure.America could not fight it alone. And it is illogic and useless to charge America with this mission. What a pity! Mingling has appeared and confusion in perception. Proceeding and cooperation in this matter (terrorism) is not a service to America like flatterers have shown. It is a self-defense for each of us. Either America was hit on 119 or not America should not reward who fight terrorism inasmuch as fighting terrorism is not a service to America as those show. It is rather a service to yourself, who among us likes terrorism, who among us likes to live with his children, people and state in a world where terrorism prevails. Terrorism is an awful thing.

Unfortunately, the world has shown a high level of hypocrisy, from which has resulted world uneasiness: are we defending America and helping to retaliate and punish those who stroke on 119? Are we adopting an international program to fight terrorism, or according to our wishes eliminating it?

There is a great deference between both matters. Hypocrisy, fear and greediness are the elements behind this mingling, and this confusion these days.

There are pigheaded people that refused to cooperate to fight terrorism, because it has been connected with defending America, or with participation with it against Afghanistan.

Although America, as I said, does not need anybody to aide it in defending itself or in taking revenge. As for terrorism the matter is different. Towards it we need each to other, we need really an international cooperation striving long breath and new international policy. But the terrorism subject is a sea without shore. [good line] We should not delude ourselves by thinking that we are capable of.

....[omitted Gaddafi taunting the UK for using an Afghan Arab to attempt to assassinate him (touche!)]..

Therefore, we should completely distinguish between what is under preparation actually against Afghanistan; as it appears as a direct result from what has happened in the form of dreadful act on the day 11/9 and fighting terrorism at the world level. [that is, not “against” Islam]

The first is the US responsibility and the second is the world responsibility. There is no excuse for non cooperating, and or non-allying for the second subject, e.g. fighting terrorism, if we agree about it’’s identification, and reasons. Delaying or non-making it makes us neglect humanity’’s future, and disappoint next generations.

Terrorism is a fact, justified by those who exercise it. This is the grave thing. But if Northern Ireland case is resolved in a satisfactory way for all, there would not be an Irish violence or terrorism as nominated by the UK and legitimate struggle as nominated by the Irish Republican Army. If the Palestinian cause goes in the same manner, there would not be Palestinian terrorism as claimed by the Israelis or legitimate armed struggle as nominated by the Palestinians. There shall not rather be any hostility between Arabs and America. But are those reasons? Terrorism? No not at all: There are multiple other cases and groups exercising violence, terrorism and struggle far from Ireland and far from Palestine. There are for instance, no limitation; the Philippines, Chechnya, Kashmir, the Tibet, the Basques, Corsica and Tamil…… etc.

How will Russia, America and Saudi Arabia agree about identifying what happens in Chechnya? Russia considers it terrorism and a plot against its unity. America considers it repression against auto-determination and human rights. The mosques in Saudi Arabia consider it a holy war and pray for its victory.

I consider it a plot against Muslims in Russia to isolate, dwarf them and deprive then from being nationals in a nuclear state.

Muslims may govern it one day as being Russians having the right to reach highest positions in there state; Russia.

Consequently Bosnia chapter was a plot and a calamity over Muslims, as well as Chechens. There are other groups exercising violence and terrorism in Southern and Northern America, as well as in Europe and Japan. If we argumentatively succeed and eliminate these groups, there is the mafia, and drug groups. And if we overcome them for instance by any way, there are other wicked groups that falsify currencies (there are more than 500 billions falsified dollars). Others launder dirty monies. Others smuggle arms, sell children or trade women. Then come Seattle group [he recognizes anarchists as a threat?] and thereafter, Jobless, dismissed and poor people. Population explosion, migration, minorities, nationalities and religions conflict, Rebelled scientists, frivolous amateurs, bacterial virus, electronic and biological war…… etc.

I do not imagine that any responsible state in the world will fail to or contradict contribution in fighting terrorism. However, today we are hearing about states that have agreed, and others refused. What is this? The reason is because we mixed between advocating a state against its enemy, and fighting terrorism, which is the enemy of all. Are we against Islam? We Arabs, we Muslims.

Not he who is against Ben Laden or against the so-called Al Qaida Organization is against Islam. And not he who is against Taliban is against Islam. I do not think that we are against Ben Laden in his person or against his youths that anti Soviet Union state, then, have trained. Nor we are against students’’ movement as one of Afghan factions. We are against the heretical movement that emerged from that region, [is he anti-Gulf arab?] exactly as it has emerged from there during caliphs days and killed Omar, Ali and Othman i.e. three from the four caliphs. We are victims of aggression, assassination and terror from those groups that come out of our countries stealthily to fight the Soviet Union in Afghanistan on behalf of others as mercenaries. Even if the Russian army entered according to a request from the pro- Moscow Afghan government. Exactly just as foreign armies enter actually according to request from their governments. And this is Ben Laden pretext in his interview broadcast by a TV station. Those groups come back to devastate and kill whoever they find on their way, even children and women, whom they mutilate. Accompanied with a call subversive to Islam. They want to spread a wave of debauchery, tergiversation libertinism and consider others than them as miscreant. While they are exercising infidelity, dissoluteness, wrongdoing, misdeed and outrages for the sake of proceeding in an enraged way towards the unknown without a theory or a specified goal.

This is a self-defense. It is necessary, and legitimate. Likewise we do not accept a new caliphate succession. We shall resist it with all means we posses. We shall not deliver our necks against to a successor to govern us by order of Allah. Though Allah did not order him to. He has no contact with Allah.

Now a door may be opened once again in front of some errant category that are easy to exploit. They shall be disappointed, return to their respective countries and to America itself. [American mujahadin volunteers?] They shall exercise terrorism and madness like it was exercise by the first group. We shall then harvest thorns that our hands have planted like the previous time “O! Lord! You witness, I did announce.”

Therefore, we are in front of new global, and complicated challenges, that make it wise to look to them without a humanitarian civilized perspective devoid of religious, ethnic, linguistic and geographic emotions.Rag fanaticism or past forms are useless. Neither are useful missiles and bombs with it. We should reexamine everything. And bet for nothing. Because all what is in our hands is nothing.

In light of Muammar's latest about bio-terrorism, I'm reposting my prior post of his earlier speech.

No doubt all the brain processes are not there, but even before 911 Libya has been attempting a rapprochement with UK and USA. He even donated money to our Red Cross (I know, but...). He is not blaming Israel, the USA, etc. etc. In fact, his speech shows a global view of the situation.

What do you think? He hates the fundamentalists (noting the UK used an Afghan Arab to attempt to assinate him-touche!). He has a large country with small population, lots of oil, lots of former NATO bases. Can bygones be bygones? Shouldn't we be e-mailing Gaddafi's statements everywhere in our information war? ...

However his name is spelled, his Islamic movement is opposed to the Osama brand of Islam. He is also insane and I am sure that what if he does it in his mind it is not terrorisim, only when someone else does it is it terrorisim. Plus its good press. He is as clever as a loon.

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.