Open Letter to Cynthia McKinney

Cynthia McKinney – Tripoli Transcript – May 25, 2011

Former Congresswomen Cynthia McKinney recently appeared on Tripoli government television condemning the US support for NATO bombing of Gadhafi forces in Libya and denouncing US policy. She implied that the allegations that Gadhafi forces are mercenaries is propaganda. She has previously praised Gadhafi and his Green Book as proponents of democracy, and claimed that the economic wage system was a form of slavery and that Libya is in Africa and Africans were enslaved by the West.

I will post a complete transcript of what she had to say as soon as I have a copy. In the meantime, I want to respond to what she said in order to set the historical record straight. - Bill Kelly










SLAVE MARKET AT TRIPOLI








CYNTHIA MCKINNEY:

“And so when we initially heard the assertion or the allegation that the Libyan government had employed black mercenaries, it sounded exactly like the kind of propaganda that we blacks in the United States are so well accustomed to. Because the fact of the matter is, Libya is in Africa, and so therefore it is not unusual for there to be people who look like me. And the ….be seen, particularly by black people in the United States, was almost insulting in the highest order…”

“Actually I have seen more since I have been here, that was available, therefore I think it important for people to understand what is happening here, and it is important that people all over the world….”

“I come here with a heavy heart…the government of the United States fails to represent the interests of the American people now. The government is here, and the people of the United States are here. And what we are searching for, and I have joined Senator Gravel in this effort...”

AN OPEN LETTER TO CYNTHIA MCKINNEY

Dear Cynthia, Your implication that reports of the Gadhafi regime hiring mercenaries to kill Libyans is propaganda is untrue, and in fact, it has been documented extensively that foreign troops have been brought in to fight for Gadhafi.

In addition, your statement that Libya is in Africa and Africa is black like you and blacks were enslaved, fails to take into consideration that in 1800 the black and Muslim states of North Africa pirated American ships and enslaved their crews, demanding payment of tribute to stop the practice and ransom for the enslaved prisoners. These attacks led to the creation of the US Navy and the first American war against the Barbary pirates.

While you denounce the NATO bombing of Gadhafi forces, you remained silent when Gadhafi’s army laid siege to Misratah, shelled the city unmercifully and raped its women in systematic fashion, as captured soldiers have testified and the videos from their cell phones have documented.

You have implied in the past that Gadhafi’s Green Book promotes democracy, and you are against the economic enslavement of wages, but Gadhafi’s chance at bringing democracy to Libya has come and gone, and Mohamid Bouazizi inspired the new Arab revolution because he couldn’t get a job and opened a fruit cart stand that was taken away from him by the government, a government that was toppled in 18 days by the subsequent revolt he inspired by setting himself on fire.

We don’t fight in Libya for oil, military bases, to break old alliances or make new ones, we do it for the same reasons revolutionary Americans fought for, and the same reasons the young Arab men and women are fighting for today – liberty, economic freedom, democracy and true self-determination, and not the autocratic rule of tyrannical dictators like Gadhafi.

As someone who has always been a rebel at home, it is hard to believe that you would reject the hopes, beliefs and determination of the young Arab men and women who are leading the revolt against tyranny in their homelands, and instead take the side of the dictatorial tyrant who has hired mercenaries to rape and slaughter his own people and refuses to step aside and let a free Libya develop its open economy and democracy.

William Kelly billkelly3@gmail.com
(William Kelly met Cythia McKinney in Dallas and assisted her in the organization and presentation of a Congressional Briefing on 9/11 after the 9/11 Commission issued its report.)

Mercenaries in Libya: Gadhafi’s hired terrorists
By Edward M. Gabriel - 05/16/11 02:21 PM ET
http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/foreign-policy/161459-mercenaries-in-libya-gadhafis-hired-terrorists

Two weeks have passed since U.S. military forces tracked down Osama bin Laden and finally brought him to justice, a decade after 9/11. But while bin Laden is dead, the hate and violence he preached clearly isn’t. The deadly bombing in Morocco — which killed 17 and has been linked to an al Qaeda loyalist — is the most recent evidence of this.

In Libya, terrorism has a different, yet disturbing face, where hired mercenaries are terrorizing the Libyan opposition. Senior NATO officials have received information that Moammar Gadhafi is spending millions to hire mercenaries from the Polisario Front in Algeria and elsewhere to help fight the U.N.-backed coalition and quash Libyans who oppose his dictatorial regime. Credible sources report that hundreds of Polisario mercenaries are being paid $10,000 each by Gadhafi to cross Algeria into Libya to fight NATO-led forces and kill Libyan protesters and rebels.

In other words, the Polisario Front, which touts itself as a human rights champion and gets millions in humanitarian aid from the U.S. and Europe through the United Nations, is letting its members take up arms against U.S.-allied NATO forces, in defiance of the U.N. Security Council mandate, and join Gadhafi’s military campaign against the people of Libya.

As a former U.S. Ambassador to Morocco and someone who has followed the Middle East and North Africa closely for more than three decades, I find it outrageous that the Polisario Front continues to enjoy a civil reception in the official corridors of the U.S. administration and Congress, even while many of its members are engaged in a deadly shooting war against NATO forces in Libya.

And Algeria, which was one of only two Arab League nations to vote against a U.N. no-fly zone in Libya, is duplicitous in opposing U.N.-sanctioned military action against Libya while providing materiel to support Gadhafi’s forces. After capturing 15 Algerian mercenaries last month, Libyan rebel leaders charged Algeria with backing Gadhafi and “turning a blind eye” to mercenaries crossing into Libya. More recently, Libyan opposition leader Mustafa Abdel Jalil — who met with senior Obama administration officials in the White House Friday — charged that Algerian planes have been used to fly mercenaries to fight Libyan rebels. And the Africa News Agency in London now reports that 500 combat-equipped light trucks have been sent to Libya from Algeria.

If the details about mercenaries received by NATO officials are accurate, both the leadership of the Polisario and Algerian authorities stand complicit in Gadhafi’s efforts to reinforce his mercenary army. It is inconceivable that hundreds of Polisario mercenaries could be hired in the first place, or travel more than 1,000 miles from the isolated, Polisario-run camps in southwestern Algeria, without the tacit, if not explicit, support of Polisario and Algerian leaders.

Recent reports from press and policy experts have linked Polisario members to al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM), Latin American drug cartels, and other criminal groups operating in the Sahel region in Africa. Terrorist bands in these lawless expanses have kidnapped and killed foreign nationals, and engaged in illegal trafficking of drugs, arms, people and humanitarian relief supplies.

This is unacceptable. These charges of mercenary and criminal activity in Libya must be fully examined and investigated, and the U.S. government must hold the Polisario Front and Algeria accountable for their actions and complicity.

Rather than welcome them into the halls of Congress and the U.S. administration, and let them exploit our generous aid dollars, those who dare to take up arms against the U.S. and its NATO allies should face very serious consequences.

Edward M. Gabriel served as U.S. Ambassador to Morocco from 1997 to 2001, and currently advises the government of Morocco.
Gaddafi paying Polisario mercenaries $10,000 each to fight for him
http://www.tehrantimes.com/index_View.asp?code=241159
WASHINGTON — A former U.S. diplomat, Edward Gabriel, has said that the Polisario Front has been deployed in Libya to join the Gaddafi regime in its war against the rebels. Gabriel has said Gaddafi has paid Polisario fighters to fight the rebels and its NATO allies.
""Credible sources report that hundreds of Polisario mercenaries are being paid $10,000 each by Gaddafi to fight NATO-led forces and kill Libyan protesters and rebels,"" Gabriel said.

In a column on May 16 in the congressional daily The Hill, Gabriel did not say how many Polisario fighters were working for Gaddafi. The Polisario mercenaries flew into Tripoli in April.

""If the details about mercenaries received by NATO officials are accurate the leadership of the Polisario stand complicit in Gaddafi's efforts to reinforce his mercenary army,"" Gabriel said.

""Senior NATO officials have received information that Moammar Gaddafi is spending millions to hire mercenaries from the Polisario Front elsewhere to help fight the UN-backed coalition and quash Libyans who oppose his dictatorial regime,"" Gabriel said.

Gabriel, a former ambassador to Morocco and now a consultant to the North African kingdom, also cited reports that 500 combat sent light trucks to the Gaddafi regime. No further details were given.

""It is inconceivable that hundreds of Polisario mercenaries could be hired in the first place, or travel more than 1,000 miles from the isolated, Polisario-run camps,"" Gabriel said.

(Source: worldtribune.com)

More evidence has emerged in Libya of troops systematically raping women and girls linked to the uprising against Moamar Gaddafi.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/05/24/3225882.htm

Two soldiers have admitted taking part in mass rapes in the town of Misrata.

Dr Ahmed Sewehli, a British-Libyan psychiatrist who has family living in Libya, has also spoken out about what he knows of the rapes.

"There are Gaddafi men who are abducting girls from houses and are taking them to a certain hotel and they are systematically raping a woman there," he said.

"To be honest, what is happening to Libya as a whole is unbelievable and I think that is one of Gaddafi's weapons that he's using.

"I mean, this man has no problem in making sure that Libyans do not forget him."
Dr Sewehli set up the Libyan Doctors Relief fund with the help of fellow psychiatrists and psychologists to try to help the "hundreds, if not thousands" of rape victims among his compatriots.

"The [Transitional National Council's] health coordinator Dr Najib Barakat ... has said that there are over 230 reported cases in Eshtebah alone," he said.

"We are hearing of this everyday. So I think when I do go back to Libya, when this is all over, and to work there permanently as a psychiatrist, I'm going to be dealing with mostly post-traumatic stress and I'll be seeing a lot of rape victims. I hope that they do come forward."

Dr Sewehli says this abuse will be extremely damaging for the women and their families for "years and years to come" and they will need counselling, psychotherapy and in some cases medication in order to cope.

"Rape for anybody is very, very difficult. I would have to say in the Arab and Muslim world even more so because of the shame factor," he said.

"I think we're going to have to be very proactive in actually going to them, rather than them coming to us, because I think many will be reluctant to come forward.

"What I would be worried about is that many of them may be driven to even suicide, because of what has happened to them."

"When girls get married in the Middle East, it is expected that they are virgins. That is going to be another thing added on top of the assault, both the emotional and the physical assault, that's happened to these girls."

Dr Sewehli says he cannot believe what is happening in Libya.

"I never thought it would come this; that Libyans, and I have to say it is Libyans and not just mercenaries, are actually raping their own people," he said.

"And I think, to be honest, that is the worst bit of it. It's not the killing, it's not the injuring, it's not the imprisoning, it's not the torture: it's what is happening to our sisters.

"I'm just so shocked ... sometimes I've not been able to sleep just thinking about that kind of thing."

We were just told to kill, says Libyan teen soldier

Marie Colvin From:The Times, May 25
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/we-were-just-told-to-kill-says-libyan-teen-soldier/story-e6frg6so-1226062270303

THE young Libyan soldier showed almost no emotion as he described how his unit had raped four sisters, the youngest about 16, after breaking into a home in the besieged port of Misratah.

"My officer sent three of us up to the roof to guard the house while they tied up the father and mother and took the girls to two rooms, two each to a room," said Walid Abu Bakr, 17.

"My two officers and the others raped the girls first," he recalled in a monotone, still dressed in the camouflage uniform he was wearing when he surrendered 12 days ago. They were playing music. They called me down and ordered me to rape one of the girls."
Abu Bakr, from Traghen, a poor southern town, claimed he had been given hashish and was not responsible.

"She did not move much when I raped her," he said, admitting the girl had already been gang-raped. "She said in a low voice, 'There is Allah. He is watching you.' I said, 'Yes, Allah is watching me.’

Abu Bakr seemed to regard himself as a victim, however. He said he had become his family's breadwinner after his father left his sick mother and his siblings.

He joined the army when he was offered 200,000 dinars ($155,000), payable on victory for Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, he said. But he had received only a week's training at Yarmouk camp in Tripoli before being sent to Misratah as part of a militia attached to the elite Khamis brigade, named after Gaddafi's youngest son. Their mission was simple. "We were just told to kill," Abu Bakr said. The teenager said he did not keep track of how many times the four girls in the house had been raped. The soldiers in his unit had stolen 12,000 dinars and jewellery from the family, but he had not received a penny, he said.

When rebel forces began closing in on the airport road, the officers sent the family to Zliten, the next town controlled by Gaddafi's troops, and left, ordering Abu Bakr and eight others to guard the house. They never returned.

"The rebels surrounded us and we threw away our guns and surrendered," he said.

Abu Bakr, who is now held in a Misratah school with other former Gaddafi soldiers while the rebels decide what to do with them, said he had decided to speak about the rapes after talking to an Islamic cleric.

Misratah officials said the ruthless assaults by Abu Bakr and his unit had been repeated across the city. Gaddafi's soldiers, they said, had engaged in an orgy of rapes that mirrored their destruction of the city's homes and buildings.

Nothing would have prepared the women of Misratah or their families for the ferocity of the onslaught that occurred when they were trapped amid the fighting, mostly in districts that were controlled by Gaddafi's forces for two months.

The brutality emerged only when the rebels broke through loyalist lines and chased Gaddafi's troops beyond the city limits. In their wake, they found horror stories. Doctors at Hekma hospital found some of Gaddafi's soldiers had recorded video footage of rapes on their mobile phones. "They made the girls identify themselves to the camera and show their faces. Then they raped them," one doctor said. The phones were found on loyalists who had been wounded or killed.

"In one of the videos, there's a woman. She's moaning, 'Oh, no, no, the sixth one, God help me'," said one doctor.

Another video shows a group of Gaddafi's soldiers in camouflage uniform breaking down a door and confronting a frightened family - a man, a woman, five girls whose ages range from about five to early 20s, and a boy aged about 7. The soldiers, shouting and waving their guns, stripped the four older girls in front of the family and took them into the next room where they raped the young women. The girls screamed and cried for mercy, calling on Allah. A soldier at one point yells: "Gaddafi is our Allah."

The video was found on the phone of a loyalist soldier.

A Filipina nurse said her best friends had fled to Tunisia after their four daughters and 13-year-old son were raped repeatedly after the family was trapped in their flat on Tripoli Street, the scene of some of the heaviest fighting in Misratah.

"I spoke to their mother," the nurse said. "She said the boy was terrible. She said, 'Don't even ask about my girls'."

So horrified is Misratah by the rapes that young rebel soldiers have offered to marry the victims, who face ostracism in this deeply traditional society.

"The rebels feel guilty that they did not arrive in time to save these families from Gaddafi's men," said Ismael Fortia, an obstetrician who estimates that up to 1000 women may have been raped.

Hardly any of those attacked have come forward because a raped woman is regarded as virtually unmarriageable if she is single, or a shame to her family if she is married.
Doctors and psychologists in Misratah have banded together to help. They will check victims for sexually transmitted diseases and offer abortions. One of their concerns is that unless they are treated, the women will suffer from depression or post-traumatic stress disorder, and may commit suicide rather than live with their memories.

"The images of their rape will go around and around in their heads, like an endless nightmare, unless they receive counselling and help," said Mustafa Shigmani, a doctor.
The terrible revelation comes as Misratah's rebels fight on three fronts around the city, loyalists try almost daily to mine the port and explosions reverberate day and night.
The people of Misratah have suffered the greatest toll in the Libyan conflict, largely because their city has been so bitterly contested by Gaddafi. It is the only population centre in the west of the country that is under rebel control.

In districts liberated by the rebels, residents described a reign of terror under Gaddafi's soldiers.

"The soldiers ordered our family out of the house while they searched," said Fatima, 47, of the Zreig neighborhood.

"They said they were looking for weapons, but they took our money, our jewellery, everything they could carry while we waited for three hours."

Families were forced to fly the green flag of the regime. Foot patrols raided homes at all hours. "They would shoot up the television if you were watching anything other than the state channel," said Fawzi Damir, 21.

Men disappeared. "They caught my husband and two of my sons," said Fatima, explaining that the men would usually flee if they spotted loyalists on their street. Two weeks ago, however, they had been taken unawares early in the morning. One son escaped by hiding under her bed.

City officials have said more than 1000 men, women and children have disappeared.

Some residents took to the streets last week to celebrate an end to the shelling of the city centre. They waved flags and shouted with joy. They were the lucky ones. One unforgivable legacy of Gaddafi is that many women of Misratah will never again emerge from their homes and think only of the beautiful sunshine.

The Sunday Times

Soccer Revolution II

Libyan pro-democracy demonstrators and fighters have a lot to plan for, not least of which is their scheduled hosting in 2013 of the Africa Cup of Nations football tournament.

http://www.daybreakingnews.com/post/Libya-Still-To-Host-African-Football-Tournament-in-2013.aspx

Apparently little heard in the din of protest demonstrations and weapons fire in the continuing battle for Libya was the declaration Tuesday by the Confederation of African Football (Caf) stating that the sports body was still thinking about Libya as a matter of priority.

Caf’s secretary-general Hicham El Amrani told BBC News yesterday that the group is also considering other options in the light of the continuing battle for Libya between pro-democracy opposition forces and troops loyal to the government of Libyan dictator Muammar al-Qaddafi.

The federation official added that the group was also taking into consideration not only the 2013 Africa Cup of Nations tournament but also the CHAN, the African Nations Championship and the Futsal Championship next year – all scheduled in Libya.

He said Plan Bs and Plan Cs were on the table, but as of today, there are no decisions to switch the tournaments to venues other than Libya.

An internal timetable has reportedly been set by the sports federation for a decision on a transfer of venue, but its head said it would not be made public prior to a meeting on the subject scheduled for September.

The CAF already had to move a competition set for earlier this year in Libya, the African U20, which had to be switched to South Africa where it was successfully staged.

On the warfront, latest reports said opposition forces were closing in on Tripoli from the east and west, claiming the liberation from government forces of two towns along the Mediterranean coast.

There has been no word however on whether the Qaddafi regime, apparently cornered in Tripoli, was about to capitulate.

BENGHAZI –

http://www.worldcrunch.com/benghazi-pre-revolution-soccer-rivalry-now-played-keeps-battlefield/3131

Recognizable by their bright red FC al-Ahli soccer jerseys, you can see them on virtually every street corner in Benghazi. Since the Libyan uprising of Feb. 17, local soccer supporters have been among those most active in trying to build of a new Libyan nation. Some have put their sweat into repairing pavements or roads. Others have gone to the front to fight against Colonel Gaddafi's troops.

But on a recent evening, a few supporters got together in Benghazi Central Square and recalled when they were routinely beaten up a decade ago because they were FC al-Ahli fans. At that time, about 30 supporters went through a living hell because they dared to rebel against Saadi Gaddafi – the third son of the Libyan leader – who back then was both owner and captain of the rival club based in Tripoli called Al Ahly Tripoli.

Soccer was then one of the few fields in which people would show their collective local pride, and more implicitly their rejection of the current regime. Thus, the Libyan dictator thought that it was anything but a harmless hobby.

In the summer of 2000, Saadi Gaddafi decided to reign in the unruly rival team after a series of on-field disputes. During a match between the two clubs, Benghazi players threatened to leave the field after two “imaginary” penalties and an offside goal were awarded to the rival team leader. Later, FC al-Ahli supporters refused to support the Libyan national team, and ransacked the premises of the Libyan Soccer Federation, which was then chaired by Saadi Gaddafi himself.

In the following days, Libya's Internal Security Forces rounded up several dozen supporters and sent them to Tripoli. “Before being transferred to the Ain Zara prison, usually reserved for political prisoners, they shaved our heads,” recalls Abdul Salam el-Mozoughi, a strapping fan, now 42. “We were tortured for five weeks. Our torturers wanted us to confess to the worst crimes imaginable. Gaddafi's soldiers treated us like terrorists. They wanted us to say that we were in touch with political opponents in exile.”

In the meantime, Benghazi's FC al-Ahli was temporarily disbanded, as 34 defendants were accused of attempting to create a political party, insulting the Libyan guide's family and criminal conspiracy. Three of the defendants were sentenced to death. Those sentences were later commuted to life imprisonment.

“The truth is that Saadi Gaddafi had a grudge against us, because our team was strong, and because we refused to submit to his whims,” says Murad Rhoma, who was behind bars for three years. “On the field, the other teams' players were so afraid of his fits of anger that they did not dare to try to get the ball from him,” adds Abdul Salam el-Mozoughi, who was sentenced to 10 years' imprisonment.

The supporters, who were pardoned at the end of 2005, have got their team back now. But Saadi Gaddafi does not seem to have forgiven Benghazi's inhabitants. In the early days of Libya's revolt, he seemed to have personally ordered to shoot young protesters in Benghazi.

Many FC al-Ahli supporters have taken active roles in the Libyan revolution, only too pleased to be able to take their revenge. At the end of March, six of them were killed by accident by a NATO strike. Others were shot dead by the pro-Gaddafi troops. “Our country is worth those sacrifices,” says Murad Rhomas. The man is overjoyed to be able to speak openly of his pride. At present, like many other locals, he wants to devote himself totally to fight against Gaddafi's troops.

But as soon as the peace is won, they boast to their French visitors, the old Hugo Chavez Stadium will be re-baptized Nicolas Sarkozy Stadium. “Then it will be time to enjoy playing soccer again.”

The club that defied Gaddafi
The Guardian
Benghazi, Libya, May 27, 2011
http://www.hindustantimes.com/The-club-that-defied-Gaddafi/Article1-702448.aspx

The story of the Al-Ahly Benghazi football club offers a window into the mindset of the Gaddafi family and explains some of the resentment that led to the revolution there. For more than a decade Muammar Gaddafi and his footballing son, Saadi, conspired to destroy Libya’s oldest club. In 2000, the club faced relegation and the primary reason, the squad insisted, was a conspiracy by Saadi who captained Ah Ahly Tripoli and headed the Libyan Football Federation.

Having already used his wallet to lure several Benghazi players to Tripoli, Saadi set about rigging games by bribing or coercing match officials. Indeed, throughout the season, Al-Ahly appeared to be on the wrong side of refereeing decisions. On 20 July 2000, the team needed a draw from their last game to survive and their opponents were awarded a dubious penalty and Benghazi fans invaded the pitch, forcing the match to be abandoned. A donkey made an appearance, clad in a shirt with Saadi’s number.

Gaddafi waited until 1 September to take revenge. During Friday prayers, bulldozers destroyed Al-Ahly’s training ground and team offices. The club was hit with relegation and an indefinite ban.

32 fans and staff were sent to prison in Tripoli, most were given sentences of between three and 10 years. Three men received the death penalty.

Today, the site contains only a building and a training field. At the old ground, piles of rubble are all that remain. “We still don’t know why Gaddafi did this to Al-Ahly,” said Moataz Ben Amer, the current club captain. “Football takes the attention of the youth away from bigger issues like politics. But Gaddafi does not understand that.”

Curiosly, Gaddafi sent Saadi to Benghazi in February to end the uprising. Realising he had no chance, Saadi exited, but not before giving orders to shoot unarmed protesters, according to local people and a BBC Panorama report.


DIY demolition on Gaddafi's pet projects
By Andrew Hosken
BBC News, Benghazi

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/from_our_own_correspondent/9504105.stm

The antipathy between Col Muammar Gaddafi and the so-called "rebel stronghold of Benghazi" runs deep, with the Libyan leader leaving a trail of unfinished construction projects there.

The other day I was taken to see a pile of rubble in Benghazi.

As you can imagine, there are quite a few piles of rubble in Benghazi at the moment, with little to distinguish them.

But this pile stood next to fragments of a sports stadium and, lurking morosely on the periphery of some wasteland, were half a dozen or so floodlights, their long-extinguished lamps dipped more in pity than illumination.

This was once the club HQ of the Al-Ahly Benghazi football club, and the remarkable story of how its hallowed turf was turned into scorched earth revealed much about Libya under Col Gaddafi and his family, and why the revolution originated in this extraordinary city.

In recent months a number of important places have been reduced to ruins in what is habitually referred to as the "rebel stronghold of Benghazi".

Both the ministry of internal security and the hated Katiba army barracks have felt the force of revolutionary fervour.

At the Katiba, the rebels requisitioned bulldozers from a local plant hire company to conduct arbitrary demolitions, as well as making a number of other alterations by means of fire.

Col Gaddafi always stayed in the Katiba during his few visits to Benghazi, whose people he always distrusted.

I had a look around, and I doubted very much whether he would like what they have done with the place.

As for the football club, retribution came its way in the shape of Col Gaddafi's football-obsessed son, Saadi.

In 2000, the fans of al-Ahly tired of the alleged match-fixing antics of Saadi, who ran a rival club in Tripoli.
They dressed a donkey in Saadi's football strip and generally behaved in the boorish way most of us expect to see on terraces the world over.

But Saadi's love of the game did not extend to tolerating the puerile behaviour of a few rival fans.

He had the clubhouse razed to the ground and arrested scores of fans - three were sentenced to death.

It is little wonder that among those rampaging around the Katiba were many al-Ahly fans, looking for a sudden-death goal against the regime in extra time.
Job half done
It is a remarkable story for many reasons - not least because the efficiency shown by the Gaddafi regime in knocking down the club stands in complete contrast to its apparent inability to put up any long-lasting legacy, particularly in Benghazi.
A young engineering student called Abdelsalam agreed to take me on a strange tour of the great building projects that the regime, for all its supposed ruthlessness, has failed to see through to completion.

First up, the west Benghazi new town project 2000. "Oil brings us $120bn (£732bn) a year," said Abdelsalam, "and yet everyone lives with their parents."

West Benghazi was supposed to provide the city's youth with an extra 200,000 homes and yet, as far as the eye could see, the husks of incomplete apartment blocks were all that constituted the promised utopia - that, and the many cranes that stood idly by.

Nearby, a placard hailed another Gaddafi project, the great trans-Libyan railway line, linking Tobruk and Egypt in the east with Tripoli and the west, and beyond to Tunisia.

You learned very quickly around here that Col Gaddafi was very fond of placards heralding grand new building projects.
What was happening behind the scaffolding was often very different, as was the case for the great trans-Libyan railway.
There was no great terminus (as yet), but the buffers seemed very soundly constructed. From here, the twin tracks coursed their way through the desert for about 800m before petering out beside a resting goatherd and his flock.
"What did I tell you?" exulted my young engineer guide.

Not only had Gaddafi failed to make the railways run on time he had... um... failed to make the railways.

Then it was off to Benghazi's newly-finished hospital.

"Started 40 years ago and just completed," said Abdelsalam. "They started and finished Dubai in the same time."

Then a look at the far-from-finished and apparently abandoned March 28th football stadium, where Libya hoped to host the 2013 African Cup of Nations tournament.

Other unfinished works included a cafe complex, a golf course and another of the colonel's celebrated man-made rivers, laid low by a big corporate bankruptcy.

"We in Benghazi always know this of Gaddafi," Abdelsalam told me. "The guy just can't finish anything he starts."

So here was a dictator whose diktat did not appear to run as far as building contractors, nor would it seem to the people of Benghazi.

"You can folly some of the people some of the time," said a graffiti message with delightful malapropism on a broken wall inside the Katiba. "But you can't folly all the people all of the time."

President's Speech on Arab Revolt

 

The State Department is a fitting venue to mark a new chapter in American diplomacy. For six months, we have witnessed an extraordinary change take place in the Middle East and North Africa. Square by square; town by town; country by country; the people have risen up to demand their basic human rights. Two leaders have stepped aside. More may follow. And though these countries may be a great distance from our shores, we know that our own future is bound to this region by the forces of economics and security; history and faith.

Today, I would like to talk about this change – the forces that are driving it, and how we can respond in a way that advances our values and strengthens our security. Already, we have done much to shift our foreign policy following a decade defined by two costly conflicts. After years of war in Iraq, we have removed 100,000 American troops and ended our combat mission there. In Afghanistan, we have broken the Taliban’s momentum, and this July we will begin to bring our troops home and continue transition to Afghan lead. And after years of war against al Qaeda and its affiliates, we have dealt al Qaeda a huge blow by killing its leader – Osama bin Laden.

Bin Laden was no martyr. He was a mass murderer who offered a message of hate – an insistence that Muslims had to take up arms against the West, and that violence against men, women and children was the only path to change. He rejected democracy and individual rights for Muslims in favor of violent extremism; his agenda focused on what he could destroy – not what he could build.

Bin Laden and his murderous vision won some adherents. But even before his death, al Qaeda was losing its struggle for relevance, as the overwhelming majority of people saw that the slaughter of innocents did not answer their cries for a better life. By the time we found bin Laden, al Qaeda’s agenda had come to be seen by the vast majority of the region as a dead end, and the people of the Middle East and North Africa had taken their future into their own hands.

That story of self-determination began six months ago in Tunisia. On December 17, a young vendor named Mohammed Bouazizi was devastated when a police officer confiscated his cart. This was not unique. It is the same kind of humiliation that takes place every day in many parts of the world – the relentless tyranny of governments that deny their citizens dignity. Only this time, something different happened. After local officials refused to hear his complaint, this young man who had never been particularly active in politics went to the headquarters of the provincial government, doused himself in fuel, and lit himself on fire.

Sometimes, in the course of history, the actions of ordinary citizens spark movements for change because they speak to a longing for freedom that has built up for years. In America, think of the defiance of those patriots in Boston who refused to pay taxes to a King, or the dignity of Rosa Parks as she sat courageously in her seat. So it was in Tunisia, as that vendor’s act of desperation tapped into the frustration felt throughout the country. Hundreds of protesters took to the streets, then thousands. And in the face of batons and sometimes bullets, they refused to go home – day after day, week after week, until a dictator of more than two decades finally left power.

The story of this Revolution, and the ones that followed, should not have come as a surprise. The nations of the Middle East and North Africa won their independence long ago, but in too many places their people did not. In too many countries, power has been concentrated in the hands of the few. In too many countries, a citizen like that young vendor had nowhere to turn – no honest judiciary to hear his case; no independent media to give him voice; no credible political party to represent his views; no free and fair election where he could choose his leader.

This lack of self determination – the chance to make of your life what you will – has applied to the region’s economy as well. Yes, some nations are blessed with wealth in oil and gas, and that has led to pockets of prosperity. But in a global economy based on knowledge and innovation, no development strategy can be based solely upon what comes out of the ground. Nor can people reach their potential when you cannot start a business without paying a bribe.

In the face of these challenges, too many leaders in the region tried to direct their people’s grievances elsewhere. The West was blamed as the source of all ills, a half century after the end of colonialism. Antagonism toward Israel became the only acceptable outlet for political expression. Divisions of tribe, ethnicity and religious sect were manipulated as a means of holding on to power, or taking it away from somebody else.

But the events of the past six months show us that strategies of repression and diversion won’t work anymore. Satellite television and the Internet provide a window into the wider world – a world of astonishing progress in places like India, Indonesia and Brazil. Cell phones and social networks allow young people to connect and organize like never before. A new generation has emerged. And their voices tell us that change cannot be denied.

In Cairo, we heard the voice of the young mother who said, “It’s like I can finally breathe fresh air for the first time.”

In Sanaa, we heard the students who chanted, “The night must come to an end.”

In Benghazi, we heard the engineer who said, “Our words are free now. It’s a feeling you can’t explain.”

In Damascus, we heard the young man who said, “After the first yelling, the first shout, you feel dignity.”

Those shouts of human dignity are being heard across the region. And through the moral force of non-violence, the people of the region have achieved more change in six months than terrorists have accomplished in decades.

Of course, change of this magnitude does not come easily. In our day and age – a time of 24 hour news cycles, and constant communication – people expect the transformation of the region to be resolved in a matter of weeks. But it will be years before this story reaches its end. Along the way, there will be good days, and bad days. In some places, change will be swift; in others, gradual. And as we have seen, calls for change may give way to fierce contests for power.

The question before us is what role America will play as this story unfolds. For decades, the United States has pursued a set of core interests in the region: countering terrorism and stopping the spread of nuclear weapons; securing the free flow of commerce, and safe-guarding the security of the region; standing up for Israel’s security and pursuing Arab-Israeli peace.

We will continue to do these things, with the firm belief that America’s interests are not hostile to peoples’ hopes; they are essential to them. We believe that no one benefits from a nuclear arms race in the region, or al Qaeda’s brutal attacks. People everywhere would see their economies crippled by a cut off in energy supplies. As we did in the Gulf War, we will not tolerate aggression across borders, and we will keep our commitments to friends and partners.

Yet we must acknowledge that a strategy based solely upon the narrow pursuit of these interests will not fill an empty stomach or allow someone to speak their mind. Moreover, failure to speak to the broader aspirations of ordinary people will only feed the suspicion that has festered for years that the United States pursues our own interests at their expense. Given that this mistrust runs both ways – as Americans have been seared by hostage taking, violent rhetoric, and terrorist attacks that have killed thousands of our citizens – a failure to change our approach threatens a deepening spiral of division between the United States and Muslim communities.

That’s why, two years ago in Cairo, I began to broaden our engagement based upon mutual interests and mutual respect. I believed then – and I believe now – that we have a stake not just in the stability of nations, but in the self determination of individuals. The status quo is not sustainable. Societies held together by fear and repression may offer the illusion of stability for a time, but they are built upon fault lines that will eventually tear asunder.

So we face an historic opportunity. We have embraced the chance to show that America values the dignity of the street vendor in Tunisia more than the raw power of the dictator. There must be no doubt that the United States of America welcomes change that advances self-determination and opportunity. Yes, there will be perils that accompany this moment of promise. But after decades of accepting the world as it is in the region, we have a chance to pursue the world as it should be.

As we do, we must proceed with a sense of humility. It is not America that put people into the streets of Tunis and Cairo – it was the people themselves who launched these movements, and must determine their outcome. Not every country will follow our particular form of representative democracy, and there will be times when our short term interests do not align perfectly with our long term vision of the region. But we can – and will – speak out for a set of core principles – principles that have guided our response to the events over the past six months:

The United States opposes the use of violence and repression against the people of the region.

We support a set of universal rights. Those rights include free speech; the freedom of peaceful assembly; freedom of religion; equality for men and women under the rule of law; and the right to choose your own leaders – whether you live in Baghdad or Damascus; Sanaa or Tehran.

And finally, we support political and economic reform in the Middle East and North Africa that can meet the legitimate aspirations of ordinary people throughout the region.

Our support for these principles is not a secondary interest– today I am making it clear that it is a top priority that must be translated into concrete actions, and supported by all of the diplomatic, economic and strategic tools at our disposal.

Let me be specific. First, it will be the policy of the United States to promote reform across the region, and to support transitions to democracy.

That effort begins in Egypt and Tunisia, where the stakes are high –as Tunisia was at the vanguard of this democratic wave, and Egypt is both a longstanding partner and the Arab World’s largest nation. Both nations can set a strong example through free and fair elections; a vibrant civil society; accountable and effective democratic institutions; and responsible regional leadership. But our support must also extend to nations where transitions have yet to take place.

Unfortunately, in too many countries, calls for change have been answered by violence. The most extreme example is Libya, where Moammar Gaddafi launched a war against his people, promising to hunt them down like rats. As I said when the United States joined an international coalition to intervene, we cannot prevent every injustice perpetrated by a regime against its people, and we have learned from our experience in Iraq just how costly and difficult it is to impose regime change by force – no matter how well-intended it may be.

But in Libya, we saw the prospect of imminent massacre, had a mandate for action, and heard the Libyan people’s call for help. Had we not acted along with our NATO allies and regional coalition partners, thousands would have been killed. The message would have been clear: keep power by killing as many people as it takes. Now, time is working against Gaddafi. He does not have control over his country. The opposition has organized a legitimate and credible Interim Council. And when Gaddafi inevitably leaves or is forced from power, decades of provocation will come to an end, and the transition to a democratic Libya can proceed.

While Libya has faced violence on the greatest scale, it is not the only place where leaders have turned to repression to remain in power. Most recently, the Syrian regime has chosen the path of murder and the mass arrests of its citizens. The United States has condemned these actions, and working with the international community we have stepped up our sanctions on the Syrian regime – including sanctions announced yesterday on President Assad and those around him.

The Syrian people have shown their courage in demanding a transition to democracy. President Assad now has a choice: he can lead that transition, or get out of the way. The Syrian government must stop shooting demonstrators and allow peaceful protests; release political prisoners and stop unjust arrests; allow human rights monitors to have access to cities like Dara’a; and start a serious dialogue to advance a democratic transition. Otherwise, President Assad and his regime will continue to be challenged from within and isolated abroad.

Thus far, Syria has followed its Iranian ally, seeking assistance from Tehran in the tactics of suppression. This speaks to the hypocrisy of the Iranian regime, which says it stand for the rights of protesters abroad, yet suppresses its people at home. Let us remember that the first peaceful protests were in the streets of Tehran, where the government brutalized women and men, and threw innocent people into jail. We still hear the chants echo from the rooftops of Tehran. The image of a young woman dying in the streets is still seared in our memory. And we will continue to insist that the Iranian people deserve their universal rights, and a government that does not smother their aspirations.

Our opposition to Iran’s intolerance – as well as its illicit nuclear program, and its sponsorship of terror – is well known. But if America is to be credible, we must acknowledge that our friends in the region have not all reacted to the demands for change consistent with the principles that I have outlined today. That is true in Yemen, where President Saleh needs to follow through on his commitment to transfer power. And that is true, today, in Bahrain.

Bahrain is a long-standing partner, and we are committed to its security. We recognize that Iran has tried to take advantage of the turmoil there, and that the Bahraini government has a legitimate interest in the rule of law. Nevertheless, we have insisted publically and privately that mass arrests and brute force are at odds with the universal rights of Bahrain’s citizens, and will not make legitimate calls for reform go away. The only way forward is for the government and opposition to engage in a dialogue, and you can’t have a real dialogue when parts of the peaceful opposition are in jail. The government must create the conditions for dialogue, and the opposition must participate to forge a just future for all Bahrainis.

Indeed, one of the broader lessons to be drawn from this period is that sectarian divides need not lead to conflict. In Iraq, we see the promise of a multi-ethnic, multi-sectarian democracy. There, the Iraqi people have rejected the perils of political violence for a democratic process, even as they have taken full responsibility for their own security. Like all new democracies, they will face setbacks. But Iraq is poised to play a key role in the region if it continues its peaceful progress. As they do, we will be proud to stand with them as a steadfast partner.

So in the months ahead, America must use all our influence to encourage reform in the region. Even as we acknowledge that each country is different, we will need to speak honestly about the principles that we believe in, with friend and foe alike. Our message is simple: if you take the risks that reform entails, you will have the full support of the United States. We must also build on our efforts to broaden our engagement beyond elites, so that we reach the people who will shape the future – particularly young people.

We will continue to make good on the commitments that I made in Cairo – to build networks of entrepreneurs, and expand exchanges in education; to foster cooperation in science and technology, and combat disease. Across the region, we intend to provide assistance to civil society, including those that may not be officially sanctioned, and who speak uncomfortable truths. And we will use the technology to connect with – and listen to – the voices of the people.

In fact, real reform will not come at the ballot box alone. Through our efforts we must support those basic rights to speak your mind and access information. We will support open access to the Internet, and the right of journalists to be heard – whether it’s a big news organization or a blogger. In the 21st century, information is power; the truth cannot be hidden; and the legitimacy of governments will ultimately depend on active and informed citizens.

Such open discourse is important even if what is said does not square with our worldview. America respects the right of all peaceful and law-abiding voices to be heard, even if we disagree with them. We look forward to working with all who embrace genuine and inclusive democracy. What we will oppose is an attempt by any group to restrict the rights of others, and to hold power through coercion – not consent. Because democracy depends not only on elections, but also strong and accountable institutions, and respect for the rights of minorities.

Such tolerance is particularly important when it comes to religion. In Tahrir Square, we heard Egyptians from all walks of life chant, “Muslims, Christians, we are one.” America will work to see that this spirit prevails – that all faiths are respected, and that bridges are built among them. In a region that was the birthplace of three world religions, intolerance can lead only to suffering and stagnation. And for this season of change to succeed, Coptic Christians must have the right to worship freely in Cairo, just as Shia must never have their mosques destroyed in Bahrain.

What is true for religious minorities is also true when it comes to the rights of women. History shows that countries are more prosperous and peaceful when women are empowered. That is why we will continue to insist that universal rights apply to women as well as men – by focusing assistance on child and maternal health; by helping women to teach, or start a business; by standing up for the right of women to have their voices heard, and to run for office. For the region will never reach its potential when more than half its population is prevented from achieving their potential.

Even as we promote political reform and human rights in the region, our efforts cannot stop there. So the second way that we must support positive change in the region is through our efforts to advance economic development for nations that transition to democracy.

After all, politics alone has not put protesters into the streets. The tipping point for so many people is the more constant concern of putting food on the table and providing for a family. Too many in the region wake up with few expectations other than making it through the day, and perhaps the hope that their luck will change. Throughout the region, many young people have a solid education, but closed economies leave them unable to find a job. Entrepreneurs are brimming with ideas, but corruption leaves them unable to profit from them.

The greatest untapped resource in the Middle East and North Africa is the talent of its people. In the recent protests, we see that talent on display, as people harness technology to move the world. It’s no coincidence that one of the leaders of Tahrir Square was an executive for Google. That energy now needs to be channeled, in country after country, so that economic growth can solidify the accomplishments of the street. Just as democratic revolutions can be triggered by a lack of individual opportunity, successful democratic transitions depend upon an expansion of growth and broad-based prosperity.

Drawing from what we’ve learned around the world, we think it’s important to focus on trade, not just aid; and investment, not just assistance. The goal must be a model in which protectionism gives way to openness; the reigns of commerce pass from the few to the many, and the economy generates jobs for the young. America’s support for democracy will therefore be based on ensuring financial stability; promoting reform; and integrating competitive markets with each other and the global economy – starting with Tunisia and Egypt.

First, we have asked the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund to present a plan at next week’s G-8 summit for what needs to be done to stabilize and modernize the economies of Tunisia and Egypt. Together, we must help them recover from the disruption of their democratic upheaval, and support the governments that will be elected later this year. And we are urging other countries to help Egypt and Tunisia meet its near-term financial needs.

Second, we do not want a democratic Egypt to be saddled by the debts of its past. So we will relieve a democratic Egypt of up to $1 billion in debt, and work with our Egyptian partners to invest these resources to foster growth and entrepreneurship. We will help Egypt regain access to markets by guaranteeing $1 billion in borrowing that is needed to finance infrastructure and job creation. And we will help newly democratic governments recover assets that were stolen.

Third, we are working with Congress to create Enterprise Funds to invest in Tunisia and Egypt. These will be modeled on funds that supported the transitions in Eastern Europe after the fall of the Berlin Wall. OPIC will soon launch a $2 billion facility to support private investment across the region. And we will work with allies to refocus the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development so that it provides the same support for democratic transitions and economic modernization in the Middle East and North Africa as it has in Europe.

Fourth, the United States will launch a comprehensive Trade and Investment Partnership Initiative in the Middle East and North Africa. If you take out oil exports, this region of over 400 million people exports roughly the same amount as Switzerland. So we will work with the EU to facilitate more trade within the region, build on existing agreements to promote integration with U.S. and European markets, and open the door for those countries who adopt high standards of reform and trade liberalization to construct a regional trade arrangement. Just as EU membership served as an incentive for reform in Europe, so should the vision of a modern and prosperous economy create a powerful force for reform in the Middle East and North Africa.

Prosperity also requires tearing down walls that stand in the way of progress – the corruption of elites who steal from their people; the red tape that stops an idea from becoming a business; the patronage that distributes wealth based on tribe or sect. We will help governments meet international obligations, and invest efforts anti-corruption; by working with parliamentarians who are developing reforms, and activists who use technology to hold government accountable.

Let me conclude by talking about another cornerstone of our approach to the region, and that relates to the pursuit of peace.

For decades, the conflict between Israelis and Arabs has cast a shadow over the region. For Israelis, it has meant living with the fear that their children could get blown up on a bus or by rockets fired at their homes, as well as the pain of knowing that other children in the region are taught to hate them. For Palestinians, it has meant suffering the humiliation of occupation, and never living in a nation of their own. Moreover, this conflict has come with a larger cost the Middle East, as it impedes partnerships that could bring greater security, prosperity, and empowerment to ordinary people.

My Administration has worked with the parties and the international community for over two years to end this conflict, yet expectations have gone unmet. Israeli settlement activity continues. Palestinians have walked away from talks. The world looks at a conflict that has grinded on for decades, and sees a stalemate. Indeed, there are those who argue that with all the change and uncertainty in the region, it is simply not possible to move forward.

I disagree. At a time when the people of the Middle East and North Africa are casting off the burdens of the past, the drive for a lasting peace that ends the conflict and resolves all claims is more urgent than ever.

For the Palestinians, efforts to delegitimize Israel will end in failure. Symbolic actions to isolate Israel at the United Nations in September won’t create an independent state. Palestinian leaders will not achieve peace or prosperity if Hamas insists on a path of terror and rejection. And Palestinians will never realize their independence by denying the right of Israel to exist.

As for Israel, our friendship is rooted deeply in a shared history and shared values. Our commitment to Israel’s security is unshakeable. And we will stand against attempts to single it out for criticism in international forums. But precisely because of our friendship, it is important that we tell the truth: the status quo is unsustainable, and Israel too must act boldly to advance a lasting peace.

The fact is, a growing number of Palestinians live west of the Jordan River. Technology will make it harder for Israel to defend itself. A region undergoing profound change will lead to populism in which millions of people – not just a few leaders – must believe peace is possible. The international community is tired of an endless process that never produces an outcome. The dream of a Jewish and democratic state cannot be fulfilled with permanent occupation.

Ultimately, it is up to Israelis and Palestinians to take action. No peace can be imposed upon them, nor can endless delay make the problem go away. But what America and the international community can do is state frankly what everyone knows: a lasting peace will involve two states for two peoples. Israel as a Jewish state and the homeland for the Jewish people, and the state of Palestine as the homeland for the Palestinian people; each state enjoying self-determination, mutual recognition, and peace.

So while the core issues of the conflict must be negotiated, the basis of those negotiations is clear: a viable Palestine, and a secure Israel. The United States believes that negotiations should result in two states, with permanent Palestinian borders with Israel, Jordan, and Egypt, and permanent Israeli borders with Palestine. The borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps, so that secure and recognized borders are established for both states. The Palestinian people must have the right to govern themselves, and reach their potential, in a sovereign and contiguous state.

As for security, every state has the right to self-defense, and Israel must be able to defend itself – by itself – against any threat. Provisions must also be robust enough to prevent a resurgence of terrorism; to stop the infiltration of weapons; and to provide effective border security. The full and phased withdrawal of Israeli military forces should be coordinated with the assumption of Palestinian security responsibility in a sovereign, non-militarized state. The duration of this transition period must be agreed, and the effectiveness of security arrangements must be demonstrated.

These principles provide a foundation for negotiations. Palestinians should know the territorial outlines of their state; Israelis should know that their basic security concerns will be met. I know that these steps alone will not resolve this conflict. Two wrenching and emotional issues remain: the future of Jerusalem, and the fate of Palestinian refugees. But moving forward now on the basis of territory and security provides a foundation to resolve those two issues in a way that is just and fair, and that respects the rights and aspirations of Israelis and Palestinians.

Recognizing that negotiations need to begin with the issues of territory and security does not mean that it will be easy to come back to the table. In particular, the recent announcement of an agreement between Fatah and Hamas raises profound and legitimate questions for Israel – how can one negotiate with a party that has shown itself unwilling to recognize your right to exist. In the weeks and months to come, Palestinian leaders will have to provide a credible answer to that question. Meanwhile, the United States, our Quartet partners, and the Arab states will need to continue every effort to get beyond the current impasse.

I recognize how hard this will be. Suspicion and hostility has been passed on for generations, and at times it has hardened. But I’m convinced that the majority of Israelis and Palestinians would rather look to the future than be trapped in the past. We see that spirit in the Israeli father whose son was killed by Hamas, who helped start an organization that brought together Israelis and Palestinians who had lost loved ones. He said, “I gradually realized that the only hope for progress was to recognize the face of the conflict.” And we see it in the actions of a Palestinian who lost three daughters to Israeli shells in Gaza. “I have the right to feel angry,” he said. “So many people were expecting me to hate. My answer to them is I shall not hate…Let us hope,” he said, “for tomorrow.”

That is the choice that must be made – not simply in this conflict, but across the entire region – a choice between hate and hope; between the shackles of the past, and the promise of the future. It’s a choice that must be made by leaders and by people, and it’s a choice that will define the future of a region that served as the cradle of civilization and a crucible of strife.

For all the challenges that lie ahead, we see many reasons to be hopeful. In Egypt, we see it in the efforts of young people who led protests. In Syria, we see it in the courage of those who brave bullets while chanting, ‘peaceful,’ ‘peaceful.’ In Benghazi, a city threatened with destruction, we see it in the courthouse square where people gather to celebrate the freedoms that they had never known. Across the region, those rights that we take for granted are being claimed with joy by those who are prying lose the grip of an iron fist.

For the American people, the scenes of upheaval in the region may be unsettling, but the forces driving it are not unfamiliar. Our own nation was founded through a rebellion against an empire. Our people fought a painful civil war that extended freedom and dignity to those who were enslaved. And I would not be standing here today unless past generations turned to the moral force of non-violence as a way to perfect our union – organizing, marching, and protesting peacefully together to make real those words that declared our nation: “We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal.”

Those words must guide our response to the change that is transforming the Middle East and North Africa – words which tell us that repression will fail, that tyrants will fall, and that every man and woman is endowed with certain inalienable rights. It will not be easy. There is no straight line to progress, and hardship always accompanies a season of hope. But the United States of America was founded on the belief that people should govern themselves. Now, we cannot hesitate to stand squarely on the side of those who are reaching for their rights, knowing that their success will bring about a world that is more peaceful, more stable, and more just.

Rixos Hotel Tripoli

 

With an 18,000-square-foot spa, helicopter service upon request and a self-described “culture of service perfection,” the Rixos is Tripoli’s premier hotel.

But over the weekend, the 120-room oasis in the center of the war-torn Libyan capital became a prison for the journalists working from there. Armed government forces have refused to let journalists leave. And even if they wanted to, a raging gun battle outside would probably prevent them from getting very far.

As a result, journalists from CNN, Reuters, the BBC and other international news organizations were holed up inside with no electricity or air-conditioning, forced to stand clear of any windows because of stray bullets.

“It’s just become so dangerous being here,” said CNN’s Matthew Chance, the cable channel’s senior international correspondent, who was still able to broadcast an occasional update and provided regular commentary via Twitter.

“We’re talking about heavy explosions, artillery shells, rocket-propelled grenades,” he said in a television appearance on Monday.

Over the course of the six-month conflict, the Rixos Hotel has become a hub for Libyan government officials and scores of foreign journalists, who have stayed there with the blessing of the Qaddafi government.

The government required journalists with credentials and visas to stay at the hotel, where they were kept under a close watch. Trips into Tripoli conflict zones were led by chaperones, and no journalists were allowed out without one.

The other option for foreign journalists was to trail the rebel forces as they fought their way through areas of Libya. This was seen as a less safe but also a less restrictive option. Those journalists are now reporting from the streets of Tripoli.

Government officials had turned the Rixos into something of a command center, holding news conferences and anchoring state television broadcasts there. Some officials brought their families there to stay with them.

Shortly before rebel forces swept into Tripoli and took control, Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi’s chief spokesman, Moussa Ibrahim, insisted in a press briefing at the Rixos that the city would withstand any rebel assault.

But by Sunday night, many officials had fled, leaving only a few armed men to prevent the foreign journalists from going anywhere.

Matthew Price, a correspondent for the BBC, wrote in an online entry, “Gaddafi men are outside with guns, waiting. We still can’t leave.”

By about 1 p.m. New York time, 7 p.m. in Tripoli, Mr. Chance wrote on Twitter, “Running low on food and water.” Of being held captive, he said, “It’s no fun.”

Operation Neptune Spear

 

The President's National Security Team Monitors Operation Neptune Spear
Sunday - May 1, 2011

It used to be that the general public and mainstream news media only learned about special covert operations when they failed - like the Bay of Pigs, the Iranian hostage rescue fiasco, the Iran-Contra plane crash, and Black Hawk Down in Mogadishu.

Only recently, with the close examination of the MOSSAD assassination of the Hamis leader in Dubai and now the execution of Osama Bin Laden by US Navy SEALs, do we see the nearly complete exposure of some successful assassination missions.

We actually only came to know about the Dubai hit because the doctor performing the autopsy learned who the man was, and looked closer to learn that he didn't actually die of natural causes as originally suspected, and was murdered. This led to the local police investigation turning to their intricate closed circut vidio surveillance system used by the hotels and at the airport to identify more than two dozen agents who were involved in the assassination or support activities.

With Operation Neptune Spear, it was kept totally secret without any leaks as far as I can tell, until it was over, but now we are getting a flood of information, and some disinformation about what went down in Pakistan that Sunday night.

We not only learn the secret code name for the mission, but the team is identified - SEAL Team Six, as well as its commander - Vice Admiral Wiliam H. McRaven, the locaton of their home base in Virginia, that 24 men participated in the mission as well as specially trained K9 dog.

They took off from a base in Afghanistan in two helicopters, with two backups, two specially adapted STEALTH blackhawks and two larger Chinooks, with one of the blackhawks malfunctioning and crashing and being partially destroyed at the scene, but not enough to keep photos from indicating some of the special STEALTH characteristics.

The first Tweet was posted during the attack by a young neighbor who complained about the helicopter noise, and then posted the fact that the helicopter had apparently crashed.

The entire mission lasted 38 minutes, and at least one of the soldiers had a live video camera mounted on his helmet that fed the feed witnessed at the White House Situation Room, and the Special Ops HQs in Florida, Virginia and the Pentagon.

The announcment "Geronomo KIA" was the code that the tall man the CIA surveillance team called "the Pacer" was indeed Osama Bin Laden and that he was killed, along with, we later learned, one of OBL's sons and two brothers who were couriers and close associates whose careless use of cell phones helped lead the CIA to this compound in Pakistan.

Revolutionary Rap

 

Libya's Explosive Music Revolution
by Khaled Mattawa

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2011-05-28/libyas-explosive-music-revolution-ibn-thait-and-more/#

The years Gaddafi took power were also the years the music died. Now, songs are coming out from everywhere, and fast. Plus, a video gallery of the hottest new songs and the old classics.

By Khaled Mattawa

At a Libyan pro-revolution rally in the midday heat of Doha last week, the protesters needed help. They sang the independence anthem, laughed through a spoof of a song by Muhammad Hassan, Muammar Gaddafi's chosen singer, then chanted "the blood of the martyrs will not go in vain."

Then, just as the several-hundred-strong crowd was running out of steam, someone remembered a line from a new pro-revolution song. Magically, a minivan sound system blared a remixed version into the surrounding blocks. Kids broke into dance, adults of all ages rocked to the song, and everyone joined the catchy chorus when it sounded.
Gallery: Libyan Pop Music

The new song is a full-on celebration. A litany of praise that lists all Libya's cities and regions, the song blasts Gaddafi for his decades of violent misrule and his very bad hair. Since February, when the revolt really took hold, rebels and Gaddafi's forces have been at war. But the rebels are using music as fuel.

So far, the singer's name on this anthem remains a mystery. A search on the Internet found no release date for it, copyright information, or any obvious sign of career planning. This is typical of the state of music in Libya now. Songs are coming out from everywhere, and fast.

Libya hasn't seen a resurgence of music like this since the late 1970s, when Col. Gaddafi really took Libyan politics by the throat. He had released his notorious Green Book and renamed the country. Those were the years the music died.

The profusion, diversity, and anonymity of Libya’s revolutionary music are a complete turnaround from the stifled state of Libya’s music in the Gaddafi era.

Now, Libya's independence-era anthem came back roaring after being banned for four decades. A melodic song, "We Shall Remain Here," has been the anthem most specific to this revolution. The courthouse in Benghazi that has been converted to a media center now houses several studios and practice rooms.

One of the first musicians to have distinguished himself in the Libyan revolution is the U.K.-based rapper Ibn Thabit. To his credit, Ibn Thabit's pro-revolution songs had been making the scene before the revolution.

The profusion, diversity, and anonymity of Libya's revolutionary music are a complete turnaround from the stifled state of Libya's music in the Gaddafi era.

Libya's musical heritage is rich, but little known to the rest of the world. As the country stands geographically in the middle between the Mashreq and the Maghreb, and in between Africa, Europe, and the Arab world, Libya's music echoes all the cultural currents that run through it.

The late 1960s to the mid-1970s were the golden years of Libyan music. As oil was discovered in the early 1960s, the government began to send aspiring musicians to conservatoires in Beirut and elsewhere. The nation's radio orchestras were placed under experienced ensemble leaders. Benghazi's was led by the highly accomplished Egyptian musician Atia Sharara, whose antics and elegance made him a childhood hero of mine.

The 1970s saw two urban trends emerge. Merskawi music, with its conventional lyrics and traditional rhythms along with the hard living of its singers, made it the favored sound among the young and disaffected. Singing mainly at private gatherings, Merskawi performers commanded top dollar, as well as the commensurate supply of local moonshine and hashish, which were all happily provided to them even in conservative Libya.

On the other end of the 1970s' youth rebellion spectrum, the iconoclastic Ahmed Fakroun from Benghazi struck on his own as a pop singer and has produced a substantial body of work that riffs off well-known Western hits, and incorporates folk songs and chants from Libya. Tripoli's Nasser Al-Mezdawi led a pop band that also mixed Western rock with local Libyan rhythms and gained considerable fame across the Arab world. Both are pioneers of Arabic Jeel music, which kicked off in the 1980s in Egypt and Lebanon.

The 1970s also saw the emergence of Libya's first modern female signers, such as Abeer and Tunis Meftah. They were a welcome change from the folkloric wedding singers as Najma al-Trabelsiya and Khadija al-Foonsha, who were too raunchy to receive any radio or TV play.
All this diversity pretty much ended in the late 1970s. Gaddafi's aggressive ideological dictates began to infiltrate all cultural production in Libya. The colonel's insistence on music, and arts, of the people, in reality meant an insistence that all artists praise his rule and person.

As a result, many artists were sidelined or silenced. In their place emerged Gaddafi's handpicked singer-composer, Muhammad Hassan, who in dress and manner bore a striking resemblance to the dictator he served.

Videos of Hassan's songs represent a visual montage of the Gaddafi ethos. Singing songs he scored, Hassan is usually backed by a huge ensemble of musicians and vocalists all dressed in traditional robes. The stage setting never varies from a tent-like structure in a desert landscape. Running under song lyrics derived from a shallow sense of Bedouin purity and timelessness, Hassan's musical compositions of the last 30 years also hardly differed.

Like the man that he chose to serve, Hassan has been intellectually and artistically bankrupt for decades, even as his own personal fortune and power have grown. Since the start of the revolution this February, Hassan has been among the crowded ranks of Gaddafi's servants who have been too ashamed to go on with their shameless trade, and too tainted to join the revolution's ranks.

Since the February 17 revolution began in Benghazi, new songs, especially by young and unknown singers, are coming out every day from Libya. Rap has been the choice of the young, but the ever-ready Merskawi sound has caught up with it. The more studious, classical composers have yet to gain the quietude to meditate on the diversity of emotions that have characterized Libya's revolution.

I look forward to this new era of Libyan music, in all its facets. As of now, the moment is about energy, momentum, and inspiration. My favorite number in this category has been the song that poured out of that loudspeaker van in Doha. Such spontaneity and joy has not been heard in Libya for decades, and it could not come any sooner.

Khaled Mattawa is the author of four books of poetry, most recently Tocqueville (New Issues Press). Winner of the 2010 Academy of American Poets Fellowship Prize, Mattawa is the translator of Adonis's Selected Poems which is a finalist for the Griffin Prize this year. He teaches literature at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.

Like The Daily Beast on Facebook and follow us on Twitter for updates all day long.
For inquiries, please contact The Daily Beast at editorial@thedailybeast.com.

May 28, 2011 | 7:29pm

Gadhaffi Comixs and Caricature

 

A cartoon depicting an opposition supporter splitting the head of Libyan leader Moamer Kadhafi hangs in Benghaz.

Kadhafi caricature flourishes in rebel capital

By Rory Mulholland (AFP) –

BENGHAZI, Libya — Moamer Kadhafi pumping petrol into a winged camel, Kadhafi with the tail of a snake and a forked tongue, Kadhafi as Dracula.

The flamboyant Libyan strongman is fuelling a flourishing cartoon caricature scene in the rebel stronghold of Benghazi.

Those are just a few of the themes produced by a group of young artists who reached not for their guns but for their coloured pens and spray cans when Libya's revolution kicked off in mid-February.

One of them paid for it with his life, gunned down by secret police.

The group now goes by the name of their dead colleague, Qais al-Halali, and continues its work from a ramshackle office in a makeshift media centre next to the rebel headquarters on the city's seafront.

"We draw caricatures here and then distribute them around the city. We give them to people to show at demonstrations or hang on walls," said Akram al-Bruki, 32, who uses the moniker Kimo to sign his work.

Bruki took out two commemorative posters of Halali, one showing a picture of his fresh-faced late colleague, the other showing the bruised and bloodied head of a dead man.

"He got a message to stop," delivered by Kadhafi's forces before they were chased out of the eastern city. "But he didn't stop. When we started doing this we swore that no-one would stop us."

The secret police finally caught up with Halali in late March, shooting him dead as he drove up to a checkpoint, said Bruki.

Bruki and his three colleagues vowed afterwards to step up their production to play their part in trying to bring about the downfall of the man who had ruled their country since before they were born.

"We didn't go to the front. We fight with pictures and words," said Ahmed Ahreb, 33, who writes captions and speech bubbles for the cartoons his friends make.

The walls of their office and of the whole media centre were jammed with their pictures and nearby buildings are daubed with graffiti and grotesque depictions of Kadhafi.

On the wall behind Bruki was a picture of Hosni Mubarak, the ex-president of Egypt who was ousted in a popular uprising in February, presenting a tray of drinks to Kadhafi.

"Take some Red Bull to help you fly," says the speech bubble above the Egyptian.

"I'm not the kind who flies. I'm going to stay," replies the Libyan.

Bruki said that the eccentric Kadhafi, with his jowly face, bushy hair, colourful clothes and penchant for glamorous female bodyguards, was an easy target for satire.

He pointed to his own favourite caricature on a wall in the media centre corridor.

"Kadhafi Cats" was the slogan above a drawing of the strongman snuggled up between two buxom women bodyguards in green army uniforms and red berets.

Bruki produced a folder with several drawings he had just finished, which he said were being sent to Egypt to figure in an exhibition there before going on to another show in Qatar.

He also proudly took out his mobile phone to display a photo of himself spray-painting a cartoon of the leader he hates on the wall of an army barracks in central Benghazi.

"It was really dangerous to do this at the time because the secret police were in the streets," he said.

He said he was convinced his group's work not only boosted morale in rebel-held areas but that it also unnerved Kadhafi, whose forces control the western half of the country.

"Kadhafi definitely sees them and they make him nervous. Many journalists have come here and filmed us or wrote articles about us, and he will see that on the television," he said.